Thanks for explaining that.
Now, what about this other draft that seems to call for recursive
resolvers to know about address translation?
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-vogt-durand-virtual-ip6-connectivity-01.txt
John
On 2009Jul21, at 2:32 PM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 02:11:45AM +0200, Peter Koch wrote:
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 09:34:58AM +0200, Matthijs Mekking wrote:
According to the behave ML, they are planning to cover that DNS
topic
indeed on the monday:
thanks for pointing this out, it's indeed an important overlap.
We're
coordinating with the behave chairs to get this resolved, which might
result in another re-scheduling. Please stay tuned ...
FWIW, I think this has been sorted out; DNS64 has been moved to the
first item in the Tuesday BEHAVE session.
A
--
Andrew Sullivan
a...@shinkuro.com
Shinkuro, Inc.
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
