::2 is reserved for IETF use. This seems like it could be a perfectly
valid such use to be defined for it.
Tony Hansen
tony(_at_)att(_dot_)com
Frank Ellermann wrote:
It's not really "controversial", it would be only nice to
hear from some IPv6 experts that ::2 is okay as sacrifice.
I.e. that nobody would ever want to list or not list that
IP for "real". Outside of a toy DNSBL with say "odd IPs",
where ::2 or 127.0.0.2 don't qualify as "odd enough".
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg