As per Relevance of the word practice, we have this rfc below:
Network Working Group R.
Request for Comments: 3152
BCP: 49 August 2001
Updates: 2874, 2772, 2766, 2553, 1886
Category: Best Current
Delegation of IP6.
Status of this
This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for
Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions
improvements. Distribution of this memo is unlimited
Copyright
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001). All Rights Reserved
This document discusses the need for delegation of the IP6.ARPA
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'
addresses to DNS names analogous to that provided by the IN-ADDR.
zone for IPv4.
The IAB recommended that the ARPA top level domain (the name is
considered an acronym for "Address and Routing Parameters Area")
used for technical infrastructure sub-domains when possible. It
already in use for IPv4 reverse mapping and has been established
the location for E.164 numbering on the Internet [RFC2916 RFC3026].
IETF consensus was reached that the IP6.ARPA domain be used
address to DNS name mapping for the IPv6 address space [RFC2874].
2. Obsoleted
This document deprecates references to IP6.INT in [RFC1886]
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
appropriate for new implementations, and IP6.INT will likely
phased out in an orderly fashion
Bush Best Current Practice [Page 1]
RFC 3152 Delegation of IP6.ARPA August 2001
3. IANA
This memo requests that the IANA delegate the IP6.ARPA
following instructions to be provided by the IAB. Names within
zone are to be further delegated to the regional IP registries
accordance with the delegation of IPv6 address space to
registries. The names allocated should be hierarchic in
with the address space assignment
4. Security
While DNS spoofing of address to name mapping has been exploited
IPv4, delegation of the IP6.ARPA zone creates no new threats to
security of the internet
5.
[RFC1886] Thomson, S. and C. Huitema, "DNS Extensions to support
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
Translation - Protocol Translation (NAT-PT)", RFC 2766,
February 2000.
[RFC2772] Rockell, R. and R. Fink, "6Bone Backbone
Guidelines", RFC 2772, February 2000.
[RFC2874] Crawford, M. and C. Huitema, "DNS Extensions to
IPv6 Address Aggregation and Renumbering", RFC 2874,
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
Randy
5147 Crystal
Bainbridge Island, WA US-98110
Phone: +1 206 780 0431
EMail: randy@psg.
Bush Best Current Practice [Page 3]
RFC 3152 Delegation of IP6.ARPA August 2001
Full Copyright
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001). All Rights Reserved
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied,
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph
included on all such copies and derivative works. However,
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other
English
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns
This document and the information contained herein is provided on
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by
Internet Society
Bush Best Current Practice [Page 4]
if you see any problems within the linking, don't worry be happy,
this is version 0.1 of the Relevance System and you gotta expect some crappy subroutines sometimes,
just be content we did not write this in Java, which would have made this "bigger and better" HAHAHHA.
RFC documents can be found at I.E.T.F.
Relevance System Copyright © 2002 Spectrum WorldResearch
other technical nosh by ServerMasters Corporation
collaboration of BobX
