Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 18:22:09 +0900
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| this part i don't really understand. if we advocate "A6 0 <128bit>"
| there will be resolver implementation that does not chase A6 chains
| at all (like for cellphones or whatever).
I had thought of adding to my message (but I wanted to keep it reasonably
brief) that the full resolver implementations are still needed now, in
the way we decide we need them to operate - which might be via an AAAA
recursive query to a back end resolver (I would expect that most baby devices
will use back end resolvers to do most of the work for IPv6, just as they
have for IPv4 - whether that includes synthesising AAAA from A6 queries though
hasn't been decided, but it certainly has been contemplated).
The advantage of A6 0 is that it would guarantee operational stability to
at least the degree of AAAA - not that it will simplify the implementation
effort (which only needs to be done a smallish number of times in the grand
scheme of things).
kre
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
