Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] [rssac] draft-ietf-dnsop-private-use-tld

2020-10-12 Thread Fred Baker
Ok, thanks. Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways... > On Oct 12, 2020, at 6:38 AM, Roy Arends wrote: > >  >>> On 12 Oct 2020, at 08:44, Fred Baker wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Oct 8, 2020, at 7:08 AM, Daniel Miga

Re: [DNSOP] [rssac] draft-ietf-dnsop-private-use-tld

2020-10-12 Thread Fred Baker
> On Oct 8, 2020, at 7:08 AM, Daniel Migault via RSSAC wrote: > > Just to let you know that the draft for the private tld has been adopted as > WG document. > > https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-dnsop-private-use-tld-00.txt > > Yours, > Daniel Thanks, Daniel. Joe and Roy, I'm trying

Re: [DNSOP] [v6ops] New Version Notification for draft-v6ops-xie-network-happyeyeballs-00.txt

2018-09-26 Thread Fred Baker
Speaking for myself, I see HE as a mechanism whose usefulness as described (selecting between IPv4 and IPv6 addresses) will wane, but which applied in a different way may have value long term. The latter has to do with access from or to multi-addressed services and selecting the one that seems

Re: [DNSOP] [v6ops] New Version Notification for draft-v6ops-xie-network-happyeyeballs-00.txt

2018-09-24 Thread Fred Baker
> On Sep 24, 2018, at 11:14 AM, 神明達哉 wrote: > > At Fri, 21 Sep 2018 14:31:50 +0800, > Davey Song wrote: > > > I just submited a new draft intending to provide better connectivity from > > network side function . Comments are welcome. > > Some quick observations: > > - I don't see why the

Re: [DNSOP] New Version Notification for draft-palet-sunset4-ipv6-ready-dns-00.txt

2017-11-25 Thread Fred Baker
> On Nov 24, 2017, at 12:47 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ > wrote: > > I’ve started also to work in a policy proposal for ICANN in order to make > sure that we get aligned. One thing you might want to think about: the root servers are all IPv6-capable today and serve

Re: [DNSOP] [renum] Dynamic DNS Update Deployment??

2011-08-16 Thread Fred Baker
On Aug 15, 2011, at 10:55 AM, Ted Lemon wrote: On Aug 15, 2011, at 1:26 AM, Leo Liu(bing) wrote: Thanks for the info, that's quite helpful. So can we assume that Windows-based DNS systems have been widely deployed rfc3007? This is kind of a bizarre conversation. DDNS use is widespread

Re: [DNSOP] [renum] Dynamic DNS Update Deployment??

2011-08-16 Thread Fred Baker
On Aug 16, 2011, at 10:34 AM, Ted Lemon wrote: On Aug 16, 2011, at 9:43 AM, Fred Baker wrote: In both cases, the addresses are concocted by the system using them. For RFC 4862, that means when the system receives a new prefix in an RA. My understanding is that Windows privacy addresses