Re: [nbs] I-D Action:draft-ubillos-name-based-sockets-03.txt

[Javier Ubillos <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 16:03 +0200, Rémi Després wrote:
> Le 19 oct. 2010 à 15:03, Javier Ubillos a écrit :
> >>> ...
> >>>   o  ip6.arpa.  Using one of the hosts interfaces addresses as a name.
> >> 
> >> Why would I want to use this?
> > 
> > Another thing I should be more explicit about.
> > This is a construct for when a host does not have a name associated with
> > it. Then a name can be synthesized for it.
> 
> Since translations from addresses to names are generally time consuming, and not necessarily as up to date as those from names to addresses, this should, as  minimum, be an option that applications would have to request.

The whole reverse-resolution/ip6.arpa infrastructure is not very broadly
deployed.

The way I see it, it's comparable with a nonce, but which _might_
contain some valuable extra information (the IP the communication was
started with).

Also, i6.arpa -> name could very well generate multiple answers. How do
you know which one is right.

In other words, this is not a huge deal, the intention is to _maybe_
provide something that _might_ be more informative than an arbitrary
label.
If too many finds that it is just confusing and an eye-sore, we'll have
to reconsider that possibility.

// Javier