> -----邮件原件----- > 发件人: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 代表 Tony Li > 发送时间: 2008年8月6日 0:57 > 收件人: 'Xu Xiaohu'; 'Iljitsch van Beijnum' > 抄送: 'rrg Group' > 主题: RE: Does every host need a FQDN name in the future?//re:[RRG] > draft-rja-ilnp-intro-01.txt > > > > |> It would seem like it would be no different than today. If > |one had a host > |> without a FQDN, then you would need to refer to it using a > |full 128 bit > |> locator and identifier. > | > |Provided there are some hosts without FQDNs, does that mean we need a > |separate id/locator resolution infrastructure except the > |current DNS system? > > > Not at all. Such systems would be reachable via their explicit /128, just > like today. This is just pure legacy IPv6 functionality.
Hi Tony, Taking the mobility and multi-homing into account, do you still believe it is workable? Xiaohu Xu -- to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
