[125990] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [Nanog] Re: IPv6 rDNS - how will it be done?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steve Bertrand)
Tue Apr 27 21:46:23 2010
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 21:19:13 -0400
From: Steve Bertrand <steve@ipv6canada.com>
To: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
In-Reply-To: <C4604CA7-C3DC-4B34-943E-D68108153AF7@virtualized.org>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 2010.04.27 21:00, David Conrad wrote:
> On Apr 27, 2010, at 5:47 PM, Jason 'XenoPhage' Frisvold 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. If 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. Other OS's will
>>> follow suite.
>>
>> Is DDNS really considered to be the end-all answer for this?
>
> Seems it is that or not bothering with reverse anymore.
There are other solutions, which has become a major focus of mine based
on some of the results I've gathered from my little test.
About 50% (currently 50.59%) of all successful visits to my site do not
have rDNS configured for their IPv6...
That is a problem that needs a solution.
The OP has a great question here.
Steve
