Terry Manderson <terry.mander...@icann.org> wrote:
Terry> There is no policy or technical barrier to proceeding with
Terry> SOMETHING.arpa. Procedurally that, of course, would necessitate some
WG
terry> discussion and consensus.
...
Terry> c) seek a <SOMETHING>.arpa insecure special use delegation
mcr> This might cause stub resolvers to have to have two cases
mcr> (SOMETHING.arpa, and .homenet) eventually, but at least we could deploy
mcr> and attempt interop with SOMETHING.arpa NOW, and it would more clearly
mcr> permit "home." to be removed from code.
I believe that HOMENET should proceed immediately with asking the IAB for
<SOMETHING>.arpa.
I think that getting "home." removed from implementation is pretty important.
let's do this ask concurrently with deciding what <SOMETHING> is.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
