IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Add] Proposed charter and BoF request for IETF 106

Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> Thu, 10 October 2019 14:29 UTC

Return-Path: <jim@rfc1035.com>
X-Original-To: add@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: add@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC631120122 for <add@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 07:29:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.497
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.497 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.4, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Wpzdcu1BsxrF for <add@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 07:29:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shaun.rfc1035.com (smtp.v6.rfc1035.com [IPv6:2001:4b10:100:7::25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5F0A1200E7 for <add@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 07:29:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gromit.rfc1035.com (gromit.rfc1035.com [195.54.233.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shaun.rfc1035.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9333F2420FDE; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 14:29:22 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com>
In-Reply-To: <D7B846D5-A4B1-4CFF-9718-5E8A8D4F7286@fugue.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 15:29:21 +0100
Cc: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>, add@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <005A6F1A-D44D-4184-80AC-8E9A280E33E1@rfc1035.com>
References: <A904161A-1B02-4A9E-8AA2-D2CC0FEA6A07@rfc1035.com> <D7B846D5-A4B1-4CFF-9718-5E8A8D4F7286@fugue.com>
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/add/a_hCe9iqo-xEI8eoUK6Vp4742e4>
Subject: Re: [Add] Proposed charter and BoF request for IETF 106
X-BeenThere: add@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Applications Doing DNS <add.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/add>, <mailto:add-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/add/>
List-Post: <mailto:add@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:add-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/add>, <mailto:add-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 14:29:25 -0000


> On 9 Oct 2019, at 23:41, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> wrote:
> 
> Isn’t there already a DHCPv6 option for split horizon DNS?

I wasn’t aware of that Ted - thanks.

Even so, that option doesn’t detract from the point I was trying to make: all the stuff in the proposed charter can’t realistically be accommodated in a DHCP option (or more than one option).

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email