Subject: Re: Use of IP6.INT

From: Scott Bradner <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 16:56:18 -0500 (EST)

> I don't have a position on what domain should be used for bitstrings,
> but I'd like the choice to be made before May, when BIND 9 is
> scheduled to leave beta.

any way to have this something that gets pulled from a configuration file?

Scott
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Bill Manning <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 14:00:50 -0800 (PST)

% > I don't have a position on what domain should be used for bitstrings,
% > but I'd like the choice to be made before May, when BIND 9 is
% > scheduled to leave beta.
% 
% any way to have this something that gets pulled from a configuration file?
% 

and while your at it, can we get RR types pulled in from a config file as well?

-- 
--bill

---

From: "Matt Crawford" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 16:02:43 -0600

> any way to have this something that gets pulled from a configuration file?

That would make only a very small difference.

---

From: Bob Halley <[email-masked]>
Date: 28 Jan 2000 14:23:43 -0800

> any way to have this something that gets pulled from a configuration file?

It could be done, but I don't think it should be.

---

From: Bob Halley <[email-masked]>
Date: 28 Jan 2000 14:29:37 -0800

> and while your at it, can we get RR types pulled in from a config

I'm not sure what you mean.  Are you talking about something specific
to reverse lookups, or some kind of general RR type definition
grammar?  If the latter, the answer is "Not in BIND 9.0.0."

/Bob

---

From: Bill Manning <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 14:50:36 -0800 (PST)

% 
% Bill Manning <[email-masked]> writes:
% 
% > and while your at it, can we get RR types pulled in from a config
% > file as well?
% 
% I'm not sure what you mean.  Are you talking about something specific
% to reverse lookups, or some kind of general RR type definition
% grammar?  If the latter, the answer is "Not in BIND 9.0.0."
% 
% /Bob
% 

Sorry for this brief followup.  I've stated my peace about the folly
of abandoning the INT zone and now we have just wandered far afield 
from the ipng WG charter and into what was the old namedroppers turf.  
Its not clear where this type of thing should be discussed these days,
possibly the gab list.

A general RR type definition grammar as was proposed & coded by Hotz in 
'96/97 & independently coded by Vixie in '97. (don't know who gave him 
the idea, possibly pvm?)  A bit easier to implement than configurable 
inverse lookups eh?  example code is available in the perl implementation 
of dig.

--bill

---

From: Bill Sommerfeld <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2000 07:04:56 -0500

> It could be done, but I don't think it should be.

Actually, given the interactions between dnssec, the inverse lookup
tree, and v6 site-local addresses, it might be cleaner if it was
configurable if you want the inverse tree secured in a meaningful
way..  (but that's another can of worms..)

					- Bill