Re: [Sipping] RFC 6157 actually updates RFC 3263 too - dual stack DNS lookups
Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Mon, 03 October 2011 20:31 UTC
Return-Path: <ibc@aliax.net>
X-Original-To: sipping@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sipping@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 480B821F8E64 for <sipping@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Oct 2011 13:31:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.636
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.636 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.041, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 MY3V9bhKQit1 for <sipping@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Oct 2011 13:31:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8BBA21F8E4E for <sipping@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Oct 2011 13:31:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vx0-f172.google.com with SMTP id fo11so4846911vcb.31 for <sipping@ietf.org>; Mon, 03 Oct 2011 13:34:43 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.89.177 with SMTP id bp17mr351730vdb.447.1317674082997; Mon, 03 Oct 2011 13:34:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.118.143 with HTTP; Mon, 3 Oct 2011 13:34:42 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <AC997A5A-FB2A-48B3-86E4-95900396CA81@edvina.net>
References: <AC997A5A-FB2A-48B3-86E4-95900396CA81@edvina.net>
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2011 22:34:42 +0200
Message-ID: <CALiegf=cKeSomQ1YCJQ4bVEvY4YJLot7AY1sUL4T1Kgq_X-nNw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
To: "Olle E. Johansson" <oej@edvina.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: sipping@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Sipping] RFC 6157 actually updates RFC 3263 too - dual stack DNS lookups
X-BeenThere: sipping@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "SIPPING Working Group \(applications of SIP\)" <sipping.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sipping>, <mailto:sipping-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipping>
List-Post: <mailto:sipping@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sipping-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping>, <mailto:sipping-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2011 20:31:40 -0000
2011/10/3 Olle E. Johansson <oej@edvina.net>: > The clause about a dual-stack user agent clearly doesn't follow RFC 3263, > since it implies "and" instead of "or". There's no MUST, SHOULD or MAY > language applied here, so it seems like this is an oversight - not that RFC > 6157 is wrong, but that there should have been a more clear update to RFC > 3263. > Nitpicking, but I think it's important to clarify the DNS functionality in > regards to dual stacks. In addition, I think there's a need for a BCP to > explain how a domain can indicate > preference of address family - ipv4 or ipv6 - by using SRV entries. I expect that any vendor implementing SIP over IPv4 and IPv6 should also implement DNS A and AAAA. But I agree that there should be a mention to it somewhere in a RFC (not a "or" but an "and"). -- Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
- [Sipping] RFC 6157 actually updates RFC 3263 too … Olle E. Johansson
- Re: [Sipping] RFC 6157 actually updates RFC 3263 … Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [Sipping] RFC 6157 actually updates RFC 3263 … Vijay K. Gurbani
- Re: [Sipping] RFC 6157 actually updates RFC 3263 … Olle E. Johansson