IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Link-local IPv6 addresses in the DNS

Philip Homburg <pch-6man-1a@u-1.phicoh.com> Wed, 23 November 2011 13:00 UTC

Return-Path: <pch-b29AA871B@u-1.phicoh.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAD7021F8C67 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 05:00:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 mVE8O-er0uXg for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 05:00:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (stereo.hq.phicoh.net [130.37.15.35]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C2B921F8C66 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 05:00:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (localhost [::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by stereo.hq.phicoh.net with esmtp (Smail #76) id m1RTCQh-0001iXC; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 13:59:59 +0100
Message-Id: <m1RTCQh-0001iXC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
Subject: Re: Link-local IPv6 addresses in the DNS
From: Philip Homburg <pch-6man-1a@u-1.phicoh.com>
Sender: pch-b29AA871B@u-1.phicoh.com
References: <m1RStJG-0001jCC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <4ECC0BAB.4040401@gmail.com> <20111123014803.444C617E5E83@drugs.dv.isc.org>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 23 Nov 2011 12:48:02 +1100 ." <20111123014803.444C617E5E83@drugs.dv.isc.org>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 13:59:53 +0100
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 05:29:02 -0800
Cc: 6man <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 13:00:02 -0000

In your letter dated Wed, 23 Nov 2011 12:48:02 +1100 you wrote:
>ULA has similar scope issues.  It's just that the OS don't knock
>you over when you do bind(), connect(), sendto() and sendmsg()
>without scope information.  You can avoid using non local ULA with
>the same filtering mechanisms.

I think this a different discussion. It is whether you want to mix local and
global information in DNS. My preference would be to keep it separate (i.e.
never have globally visible zones that contain local addresses) but other
people may think differently.

However, that is a much more generic discussion that doesn't belong on this
list, but should on dnsext or something like that.

v2.19.0 | Report a Bug | By Email