RE: [dhcwg] Re: Last call for <draft-ietf-dhc-fqdn-option-02.txt>

"Christian Huitema" <huitema@windows.microsoft.com> Mon, 27 August 2001 22:33 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA03214; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 18:33:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA10532; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 18:33:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA10504 for <dhcwg@ns.ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 18:33:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from inet-vrs-03.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (mail3.microsoft.com [131.107.3.123]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id SAA03187 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 18:31:58 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from 157.54.9.100 by inet-vrs-03.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall NT); Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:32:41 -0700
Received: from red-imc-01.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.9.102]) by inet-imc-03.redmond.corp.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.2966); Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:32:41 -0700
Received: from win-imc-01.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com ([157.54.0.39]) by red-imc-01.redmond.corp.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.2966); Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:32:42 -0700
Received: from win-msg-02.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com ([157.54.0.134]) by win-imc-01.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.2966); Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:32:20 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.5716.0
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Subject: RE: [dhcwg] Re: Last call for <draft-ietf-dhc-fqdn-option-02.txt>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:32:20 -0700
Message-ID: <F66A04C29AD9034A8205949AD0C9010418BF2F@win-msg-02.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
Thread-Topic: [dhcwg] Re: Last call for <draft-ietf-dhc-fqdn-option-02.txt>
Thread-Index: AcEvQ7u1TaHbSD0uRqyCIa8dCTYH5QAA3dSA
From: "Christian Huitema" <huitema@windows.microsoft.com>
To: "Stuart Cheshire" <cheshire@apple.com>, "Mark Stapp" <mjs@cisco.com>, "DHCP discussion list" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Aug 2001 22:32:20.0737 (UTC) FILETIME=[22942710:01C12F48]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by optimus.ietf.org id SAA10505
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

> My host *did* have various names of the form
> "host217-33-141-85.ietf.ignite.net" while I was at the meeting, which
> had
> both valid forward and reverse mappings. If my host is going to have
> some
> name which it cannot control and which no one else knows, then who
> cares
> whether it was dynamically updated or not?

In this scenario, what is the tradeoff between:
    laptop.example.com IN CNAME host217-33-141-85.ietf.ignite.net
and laptop.example.com IN A 217.33.141.85 ?

Also, what are the consequences of the 6to4 address:
    laptop.example.com IN AAAA 2002:D921:8D55:0001:1234:5678:90AB:CDEF ?
(This address being derived from 217.33.141.85.)

-- Christian Huitema




_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg