On Wed, 21 Feb 2001, Paul Francis wrote:
> > That was the original motivation behind using domains in the first place.
> > But the more incentive we can find for sites to register, the more likely
> > it will be to work. Modifying resolvers to allow hosts to auto-configure
> > themselves for site-local resolution is a nice incentive, and having
> > actual data in the domains also ensures that the contact and NS
> > information for the domains will remain up-to-date in the whois database.
> >
>
> You know, I only now realized that most of your scheme is with respect to
> the usage of site-locals, not GULRs. My last couple messages in response to
> your scheme were concerning GULRs only, so please disregard them...
This is my mistake. I've been using the terms "site-local" and
GULR/unique-local interchangably, when in fact they are two separate
terms.
The site-ipv6.net zone would be used to store addresses within a site's
GULR prefix.
Your responses to my earlier messages are valid, as far as I can tell.
-Nathan
--
+-------------------+---------------------+------------------------+
| Nathan Lutchansky | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Lithium Technologies |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| I dread success. To have succeeded is to have finished one's |
| business on earth... I like a state of continual becoming, |
| with a goal in front and not behind. - George Bernard Shaw |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
