Subject: DNS discovery -04 comments

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 15:38:23 +0200 (EET)

Hi,

Just two points:

In the abstract, s/the stateful protocol/stateful protocols/ ?

In 3.2, Host behaviour of looking up NS record from the reverse of
site-locals may fail for a couple of reasons: e.g. the site could use
multiple domain names, or if the site has no reverses for site-locals, 
they might be looked up from somewhere else (as recursion is desired)..

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "Tell me of difficulties surmounted,
Netcore Oy                   not those you stumble over and fall"
Systems. Networks. Security.  -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: "Dave Thaler" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 07:40:15 -0800

> In the abstract, s/the stateful protocol/stateful protocols/ ?

Actually the "stateful" wording needs to be changed anyway, as Ralph
Droms pointed out in SLC.

> they might be looked up from somewhere else (as recursion is
desired)..

Agree, there is no perfect heuristic.  The idea is only to suggest a MAY
that is better than nothing in many cases.  When the lookup fails for
whatever reason, you're no worse off than before when you had nothing.

Thanks for the comments,
-Dave