[6bone] .int / .arpa

[iljitsch at muada.com (Iljitsch van Beijnum)]

On 17-feb-05, at 22:07, Christian Nickel wrote:

>> So how did we end up in the current x.x.x.x.ip6.arpa situation? I 
>> haven't
>> been able to find any document that mandates this, what gives?

> just read RFC3363 and you get all the answers you need :-)

Actually it doesn't, but at least more than 3364. (Am I the only one 
who is annoyed by the large numbers of RFCs about the same subject??)

> current standard is ip6.arpa in nibble format
> bitstring format is now experimental
> ip6.int is dead :-)

Actually that's not what it says. RFC 3363 (which is "informational" 
itself!) says the whole 2x7x series is now experimental, so bit labels 
are out the door. 3152 (which is BCP 49) says ip6.int is deprecated and 
ip6.arpa is the way to go, and references 2874.

Neither says in so many words that we should be doing ip6.arpa in 
nibble mode, and I think it's a pretty big leap of faith to assume that 
this is what the combination of these RFCs means to say.

In any event, there is a severe breach of IETF procedure because a BCP 
references an RFC that is demoted to "experimental" in an 
"informational" RFC.