Re: draft note to IPv6 WG on DNS discovery

[Margaret Wasserman <mrw@windriver.com>]

Thanks, Randy!

I think it is important that we all get on the same page
and start correcting each other when we fall off of it...
(I'm a prime offender).

The IPv6 WG needs to go away.  We are trying to get a charter
that will allow us to finish up a few important things (MIBs,
fix doc inconsistencies, etc.) and get our core specs to
DS.  Then, we should go on hiatus until something needs to
be done to the IPv6 documents (move others to DS, move some
to FS, or whatever).

To make this happen, we need to start pursuing all new IPv6
work in the appropriate places in the IETF -- the same places
we'd do the work if there were no IPv6 WG, just like we do for
IPv4-related things.

Margaret


At 08:48 AM 3/5/2003 -0800, Randy Bush wrote:
> > So, let's get the topic of DNS resolver autoconfiguration started
> > somewhere else -- is dnsext or dnsop a better choice?
>
> you will soon find it in dnsop
>
> randy