[125976] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [Nanog] Re: IPv6 rDNS - how will it be done?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Richard Barnes)
Tue Apr 27 20:50:49 2010
In-Reply-To: <268EBCE2-9D47-488E-8223-29B5A6323CEB@godshell.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 20:50:20 -0400
From: Richard Barnes <richard.barnes@gmail.com>
To: "Jason 'XenoPhage' Frisvold" <xenophage@godshell.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Na=EFve question: If you used macro expansion, wouldn't you end up
providing responses for a lot of addresses that aren't in use? Maybe
that's not a problem?
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Jason 'XenoPhage' Frisvold
<xenophage@godshell.com> wrote:
> On Apr 27, 2010, at 8:42 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>> Windows will just populate the reverse zone as needed, if you let
>> it, using dynamic update. =A0If you have properly deployed BCP 39
>> and have anti-spoofing ingres filtering then you can just let any
>> address from the /48 add/remove PTR records. =A0Other OS's will
>> follow suite.
>
> Is DDNS really considered to be the end-all answer for this? =A0It seems =
we're putting an awful lot of trust in the user when doing this.. =A0I'd ra=
ther see some sort of macro expansion in bind/tinydns/etc that would allow =
a range of addresses to be added.
>
>> Alternatively you can delegate the reverse for the /48 to servers
>> run by the customers.
>
> This works for commercial customers, but I'm not sure I'd want to delegat=
e this to a residential customer.
>
>> Mark
>
> ---------------------------
> Jason 'XenoPhage' Frisvold
> xenophage@godshell.com
> ---------------------------
> "Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology."
> - Niven's Inverse of Clarke's Third Law
>
>
>
>
>
