[89012] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: shim6 @ NANOG (forwarded note from John Payne)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Daniel Golding)
Tue Feb 28 23:37:57 2006
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 23:37:34 -0500
From: Daniel Golding <dgolding@burtongroup.com>
To: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>,
John Payne <john@sackheads.org>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <53CF447E-B2CB-46AD-BB89-AE6EE3FB5FFC@muada.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On 2/28/06 5:21 PM, "Iljitsch van Beijnum" <iljitsch@muada.com> wrote:
>
> On 28-feb-2006, at 23:15, John Payne wrote:
>
>>> Should be doable with a DNS SRV record like mechanism. Don't worry
>>> too much about this one.
>
>> Where does the assumption that the network operators control the
>> DNS for the end hosts come from?
>
> ...or in another way. Don't worry too much about this one.
Unacceptable. This is the whole problem with shim6 - the IETF telling us to
"sit back and enjoy it, because your vendors know what's best". This
attitude combined with Shim6's (many) limitations speed it toward
irrelevance.
--
Daniel Golding
