Re: To address or NAT to address?

To: "Charles E. Perkins" <charliep at iprg.nokia.com>
Subject: Re: To address or NAT to address?
From: "David R. Conrad" <David_Conrad at isc.org>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 14:01:42 -0800
Cc: Yakov Rekhter <yakov at cisco.com>, ietf at ietf.org
Organization: Internet Software Consortium
References: <199912021627.IAA08159@omega.cisco.com> <3846B5D3.BFDFA7E8@iprg.nokia.com>

Charlie,

> DNS is supposed to be a way to resolve domain names into IP addresses.

As a hammer is supposed to be a way to pound nails.  However, when it is
perceived that all you have is a hammer, it is amazing what begins to look
like nails.

> How else would one get an IP(v6) address from a domain name other
> than by using DNS?  Am I missing something here?

Yes.  The DNS has grown a bit from a simple lookup mechanism.
 
Rgds,
-drc

Follow-Ups:
- Re: To address or NAT to address?
  - From: Steve Deering
- Re: To address or NAT to address?
  - From: Peter Deutsch

References:
- Re: To address or NAT to address?
  - From: Yakov Rekhter
- Re: To address or NAT to address?
  - From: Charles E. Perkins

Prev by Date: Re: To address or NAT to address?
Next by Date: Re: To address or NAT to address?
Previous by thread: Re: To address or NAT to address?
Next by thread: Re: To address or NAT to address?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

Re: To address or NAT to address?

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.