One high-level comment I have about the document relates to its requirement that the mechanism be the last resort.
How is this intended to work with LLMNR (draft-ietf-dnsext-mdns-12.txt)? One way of using LLMNR is to make *it* be the last resort, but since we can't have two last resorts this is quite problematic. Also, looking at the dns-discovery draft in isolation, it is far from clear to be how one can operationally control this behavior. The document has an implementation note about recommending that there be other mechanisms which take precedence over the well-known addresses, but the document does not require this nor does it specify that a particular mandatory override hence an operator would not be able to control this behavior. Erik -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
