 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Elz" <kre at munnari.OZ.AU> > > | Lastly, I am NOT advocating any change. I merely responded > | to an implication that there was no justification for > | handling DNS for IPV6 differently than for IPv4. > > There should have been, we should be doing A6 for IPv6, that would > have made lots of sense. > IPv6 and A6 go together....they were made for each other... ...you might want to check with the ICANN Board or the .AU people for more info... AAAA is for 128-bit DNS users, and does not imply IPv6... ...as an example....2002:* AAAA records cause IPv4 packets to be produced... Jim Fleming 2002:[IPv4]:000X:03DB:...IPv8 is closer than you think... http://ipv8.dyndns.tv http://ipv8.yi.org http://ipv8.dyns.cx http://ipv8.no-ip.com http://ipv8.no-ip.org http://ipv8.no-ip.biz http://ipv8.no-ip.info http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.