Re: DNS: April 4th ADNA meeting

Re: DNS: April 4th ADNA meeting

From: George Michaelson <ggm§>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 1997 14:08:32 +1000
I don't dispute that ACA read "address" as numeric. I certainly maintain
that ADNA is *not* the body to do this without substantive agreement in
a wider base that we want that to happen.

Given the level of knowledge about this in the community I don't think
that can be done at the same time as the DNS issue.

Also, I just don't understand how this is envisaged as working given
the current non-portability of addresses under provider block issues.

under IPv6, where link-local and other forms of address take place leveraged
off manufacturer allocated MAC addresses, this is just an irrelevancy. Its
the same for the new 8+8 schema where the upper address part will be allocated
by who you talk through.

In short, unless I am dumber than I think I am this time round :-) its just
not relevant.

Shades of the ATO who think a single IP is a taxable entity...

Received on Fri Mar 21 1997 - 15:36:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:02 UTC