Subject: draft-ietf-dnsop-ipv6-dns-issues-00.txt

From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 04:47:54 +0900

during meeting presentation RFC1101-like hack was proposed.
	my take is:
	(1) it is very bad for getaddrinfo/getnameinfo to synthesize things.
	(2) see draft-ietf-dnsop-inaddr-required-04.txt, reverse mapping is
	    not required.
	(3) it is too late to change getaddrinfo/getnameinfo behavior.

	so don't do it.

itojun

#----------------------------------------------------------------------
# To unsubscribe, send a message to <[email-masked]>.

---

From: Johan Ihren <[email-masked]>
Date: 21 Nov 2002 20:27:16 +0100

> 	(3) it is too late to change getaddrinfo/getnameinfo behavior.

I fully agree with this. Most of the justification for this is to
support broken applications that barf when they fail to do the reverse
lookup. This is a problem with the broken applications that we should
not compromise the infrastructure to avoid fixing.

Johan Ihrén
Autonomica

---

From: Alain Durand <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 16:48:09 -0800

>not compromise the infrastructure to avoid fixing.
 From an architecture point of view, I would have some sympathy for this 
argument.
However, from a pragmatic point, ISP who are doing it today in v4 land  
do it for some reasons.
Can you assume that this set of reason is gone with IPv6?

    - Alain.