A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Home Networking WG of the IETF.
Title : Special Use Domain 'home.arpa.'
Authors : Pierre Pfister
Ted Lemon
Filename
This revision fixes the problem that Mark Andrews pointed out yesterday with
respect to queries for DS records for 'home.arpa.'
Before any further action occurs, we should probably wait for Mark, who I
assume is enjoying a well deserved night's sleep right now, to see if he's
happy with the new
With one day left in CFA for draft-tldm-simple-homenet-naming, here is my
summary of what I think I've read.
Exactly 3 people have expressed support for adoption (Daniel [author], Michael
R, James). Hmm. That's not a lot.
Juliusz expressed opposition to adoption, but Ray and Michael said the
r
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 08:33:11PM +, STARK, BARBARA H wrote:
> Does anyone else have an opinion? Does anyone who has expressed an opinion
> want to express a new and different opinion?
> Barbara
I haven't weighed in because I can't make up my mind.
On the one hand, I think this is a reasona
Barbara, I seem to recall that you were enthusiastic about the work when it
was discussed in the meeting. You're allowed to be one of the people
who's in favor of it, despite being chair. Indeed, as chair, you can just
adopt it by fiat if you want. I actually agree with Ray and Michael that
J
Andrew Sullivan writes:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 08:33:11PM +, STARK, BARBARA H wrote:
>> Does anyone else have an opinion? Does anyone who has expressed an opinion
>> want to express a new and different opinion?
>> Barbara
>
> I haven't weighed in because I can't make up my mind.
>
> On th
On Aug 10, 2017, at 5:07 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> with the possible exception of the
> requirement for supporting multiple provisioning domains
How would you solve the problem of dual-homing without the multiple
provisioning domain support described in the document?
_
On 10 Aug 2017, at 23.33, STARK, BARBARA H wrote:
>
> With one day left in CFA for draft-tldm-simple-homenet-naming, here is my
> summary of what I think I've read.
>
> Exactly 3 people have expressed support for adoption (Daniel [author],
> Michael R, James). Hmm. That's not a lot.
>
> Juliu
On Aug 10, 2017, at 5:48 PM, Markus Stenberg wrote:
> - 3.3
> - it implies that homenet exposes DNS outside home (by default?) and uses
> instead custom dns server logic to handle .home.arpa from ‘outside’; why not
> just firewall it and be done with it (or listen only on e.g. ULA prefix)
No, i
Ted Lemon writes:
> On Aug 10, 2017, at 5:07 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>> with the possible exception of the
>> requirement for supporting multiple provisioning domains
>
> How would you solve the problem of dual-homing without the multiple
> provisioning domain support described in the
Markus Stenberg wrote:
> - 3.5 (PVD madness)
> - WHY? can’t we get just rid of split horizon DNS madness and use _a_ DNS
instead of N DNS servers?
I am not happy with PVD stuff either, but it's not enough to block the
document. Rather, I want to adopt it so that we discuss this.
I unde
On Aug 10, 2017, at 6:07 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> Now, assuming that I am wrong and this is actually a serious issue that
> we need to solve (of which I am not opposed to being convinced), I think
> it would be feasible to come up with a solution where we could at least
> allow less cap
12 matches
Mail list logo
