IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] DNS RRTYPEs for ILNP review - Comments period end July 5th

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Thu, 28 June 2012 20:48 UTC

Return-Path: <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 272FF11E80C1 for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 13:48:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.056
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.056 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.745, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, SARE_SUB_RAND_LETTRS4=0.799, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id loV3wKyjEWI9 for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 13:48:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.bortzmeyer.org (aetius.bortzmeyer.org [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc0:41:216:3eff:fece:1902]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5405011E808A for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 13:48:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id 29BEA3B3DC; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 20:48:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail.sources.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id DAF87C952A; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 22:44:59 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 22:44:59 +0200
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
Message-ID: <20120628204459.GA20824@sources.org>
References: <AFBE7423-3069-4443-8E24-B6D1B562BC1D@nominet.org.uk> <alpine.LSU.2.00.1206141851230.2122@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1206141851230.2122@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk>
X-Transport: UUCP rules
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 6.0.5
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Cc: RJ Atkinson <rja.lists@gmail.com>, SN Bhatti <saleem@cs.st-andrews.ac.uk>, "dnsext@ietf.org" <dnsext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dnsext] DNS RRTYPEs for ILNP review - Comments period end July 5th
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 20:48:13 -0000

On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 07:09:11PM +0100,
 Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> wrote 
 a message of 36 lines which said:

> Regarding the presentation format of NID and L64 RRs, is the
> uncompressed NNNN:NNNN:NNNN:NNNN format going to be standard
> throughout ILNP? I couldn't find any mention of it in
> draft-irtf-rrg-ilnp-arch. The DNS master file presentation format
> should be the same as the usual syntax in other contexts.

I suspect that this may be because ILNP strongly discourages the use
of either NID or L64 outside of the DNS context. There is no way to
use the NID or the L64 alone to contact a host ("telnet NID" does
*not* work.) 

When you use them, it is as an IP address ("telnet L64:NID" is
discouraged and will not use ILNP to connect) so general IP address
rules will apply.

Remember that ILNP strongly relies on the DNS, much more than others
Locator-Identifier Separation proposals.

v2.27.8 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status