On 30 Sep 2015, at 12:53, Paul Hoffman wrote:
I'll add the v4/v6 wording to the post-IESG-review draft unless there is objection in the WG.
I like the v4/v6 wording, for what that's worth.
John Levine just answered your question about why the address might already be in use, which was something that was brought up in the early discussion of this draft in the WG. It means that you can't run both this and some other DNS-listening task on ::1, whereas you can run both on different addresses in 127/8. We'll cover that in the new wording.
Since a single operator controls both ends, there's no need to use a well-known port. If you can't bind to 127.0.0.1:53 because something else is already listening there, use 127.0.0.1:12345.
Joe _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
