[Asrg] Another dnsbl draft, now standards flavored

[John Levine]

>Ugh, I just send a separate mail.  Yes, it's clear why you
>picked ::2.  Now IFF ::FFFF:a.b.c.d *MUST* be treated as 
>IPv4 a.b.c.d by lists *and* clients, then ::FFFF:127.0.0.2
>is the same as 127.0.0.2. 

I don't see that in the IPv6 documents, and in any event, this draft
is about DNSBLs, not IPv6 theology.

As I read it, if you want to embed v4 addresses in v6, here's where
you do it, but in fact nobody does.

R's,
John