Re: 6MAN Working group last call: draft-ietf-6man-rdnss-rfc6106bis

[Tassos Chatzithomaoglou <[e-mail]>]

Just two comments:

>
>    Note:  The addresses for recursive DNS servers in the RDNSS option
>       MAY be link-local addresses.  Such link-local addresses SHOULD be
>       registered into the resolver repository along with the
>       corresponding link zone indices of the links that receive the
>       RDNSS option(s) for them.  The link-local addresses MAY be
>       represented with their link zone indices in the textual format for
>       scoped addresses as described in [RFC4007].  When a resolver sends
>       a DNS query message to an RDNSS with a link-local address, it MUST
>       use the corresponding link.

I guess "The link-local addresses MAY be represented with their link
zone indices in the textual format for scoped addresses as described in
[RFC4007]" refers to the representation on the resolver repository and
not on the RDNSS option. Maybe it should be clarified a bit ("The
link-local addresses MAY be represented in the resolver repository with
their link zone indices".


> The DNS options from Router Advertisements and DHCP
>    SHOULD be stored into the DNS Repository and Resolver Repository so
>    that information from DHCP appears there first and therefore takes
>    precedence.  Thus, the DNS information from DHCP takes precedence
>    over that from RA for DNS queries. 

I do not oppose to the above, but i would like to see an
explanation/justification (trust/security?) there.


--
Tassos