> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Alain Durand > Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 2:21 PM > To: Ralph Droms > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Softwires] draft-ietf-softwire-ds-lite-tunnel-option-06 > > > On Nov 10, 2010, at 1:14 AM, Ralph Droms wrote: > > > And is there a description of the "local name resolution library" (quoting > > Dave) > that meets the requirements of the softwires usage expectation? That is, does > the softwires WG expect "the usual" behavior by just handing the contents of > the option to the local name resolution library, or by formulating several > different FQDNs according to some specific rules, or ??? > > There is no special requirement here beside just resolve the FQDN... > This is, I'm sure, not the first DHCP option like this, why should we say > anything > special here? > > - Alain.
Good point. We don't need to say much of anything here. -Dave _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
