diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'contrib/bind9/doc/rfc/rfc3152.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | contrib/bind9/doc/rfc/rfc3152.txt | 227 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 227 deletions
diff --git a/contrib/bind9/doc/rfc/rfc3152.txt b/contrib/bind9/doc/rfc/rfc3152.txt deleted file mode 100644 index b226ce6..0000000 --- a/contrib/bind9/doc/rfc/rfc3152.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,227 +0,0 @@ - - - - - - -Network Working Group R. Bush -Request for Comments: 3152 RGnet -BCP: 49 August 2001 -Updates: 2874, 2772, 2766, 2553, 1886 -Category: Best Current Practice - - - Delegation of IP6.ARPA - -Status of this Memo - - This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the - Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for - improvements. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. - -Copyright Notice - - Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001). All Rights Reserved. - -Abstract - - This document discusses the need for delegation of the IP6.ARPA DNS - zone, and specifies a plan for the technical operation thereof. - -1. Why IP6.ARPA? - - In the IPv6 address space, there is a need for 'reverse mapping' of - addresses to DNS names analogous to that provided by the IN-ADDR.ARPA - zone for IPv4. - - The IAB recommended that the ARPA top level domain (the name is now - considered an acronym for "Address and Routing Parameters Area") be - used for technical infrastructure sub-domains when possible. It is - already in use for IPv4 reverse mapping and has been established as - the location for E.164 numbering on the Internet [RFC2916 RFC3026]. - - IETF consensus was reached that the IP6.ARPA domain be used for - address to DNS name mapping for the IPv6 address space [RFC2874]. - -2. Obsoleted Usage - - This document deprecates references to IP6.INT in [RFC1886] section - 2.5, [RFC2553] section 6.2.3, [RFC2766] section 4.1, [RFC2772] - section 7.1.c, and [RFC2874] section 2.5. - - In this context, 'deprecate' means that the old usage is not - appropriate for new implementations, and IP6.INT will likely be - phased out in an orderly fashion. - - - -Bush Best Current Practice [Page 1] - -RFC 3152 Delegation of IP6.ARPA August 2001 - - -3. IANA Considerations - - This memo requests that the IANA delegate the IP6.ARPA domain - following instructions to be provided by the IAB. Names within this - zone are to be further delegated to the regional IP registries in - accordance with the delegation of IPv6 address space to those - registries. The names allocated should be hierarchic in accordance - with the address space assignment. - -4. Security Considerations - - While DNS spoofing of address to name mapping has been exploited in - IPv4, delegation of the IP6.ARPA zone creates no new threats to the - security of the internet. - -5. References - - [RFC1886] Thomson, S. and C. Huitema, "DNS Extensions to support IP - version 6", RFC 1886, December 1995. - - [RFC2553] Gilligan, R., Thomson, S., Bound, J. and W. Stevens, - "Basic Socket Interface Extensions for IPv6", RFC 2553, - March 1999. - - [RFC2766] Tsirtsis, G. and P. Srisuresh, "Network Address - Translation - Protocol Translation (NAT-PT)", RFC 2766, - February 2000. - - [RFC2772] Rockell, R. and R. Fink, "6Bone Backbone Routing - Guidelines", RFC 2772, February 2000. - - [RFC2874] Crawford, M. and C. Huitema, "DNS Extensions to Support - IPv6 Address Aggregation and Renumbering", RFC 2874, July - 2001. - - [RFC2916] Faltstrom, P., "E.164 number and DNS", RFC 2916, - September 2000. - - [RFC3026] Blane, R., "Liaison to IETF/ISOC on ENUM", RFC 3026, - January 2001. - - - - - - - - - - - -Bush Best Current Practice [Page 2] - -RFC 3152 Delegation of IP6.ARPA August 2001 - - -6. Author's Address - - Randy Bush - 5147 Crystal Springs - Bainbridge Island, WA US-98110 - - Phone: +1 206 780 0431 - EMail: randy@psg.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Bush Best Current Practice [Page 3] - -RFC 3152 Delegation of IP6.ARPA August 2001 - - -Full Copyright Statement - - Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001). All Rights Reserved. - - This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to - others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it - or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published - and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any - kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are - included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this - document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing - the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other - Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of - developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for - copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be - followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than - English. - - The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be - revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. - - This document and the information contained herein is provided on an - "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING - TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING - BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION - HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF - MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. - -Acknowledgement - - Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the - Internet Society. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Bush Best Current Practice [Page 4] - |
