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

[Stephane Bortzmeyer <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 07:09:11PM +0100,
 Tony Finch <[e-mail]> 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.
_______________________________________________
dnsext mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext