[146104] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Performance Issues - PTR Records
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Matt Chung)
Wed Nov 2 21:28:49 2011
From: Matt Chung <itsmemattchung@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4EB1E753.8080300@namor.ca>
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 18:27:48 -0700
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
We really have no objections to creating records for our IPs however there w=
as no compelling reason previously. With the manifestation of performance is=
sues, we are currently creating a generic record for our addresses.=20
I assumed that the applications would take absent records into consideration=
instead of waiting and timing out before responding with data. Trying to tr=
oubleshoot this issue from the limited visibility is difficult ; the latency=
the application is introducing is abstracted (unless I am unaware of that t=
roubleshooting technique).
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 2, 2011, at 5:58 PM, J <nanog@namor.ca> wrote:
> PC wrote:
>> What happens if the ISP never defines a name server with their RIR for
>> their provider-independent address space? Does ARIN point to somewhere
>> which supplies NXDOMAIN? Just a thought -- I don't have a clue.
>>=20
>> It is entirely possible they have it pointed to their non-existent or
>> broken DNS. Given current best practices, I see no reason not to assign a=
>> generic x.x.x.x-dynamic.customer.isp.com DNS across their netblock.
>=20
> I think that returns SERVFAIL somewhere down the line?
>=20
> Does it make sense to reinforce the behaviour (good and bad terms left for=
> another time), while looking forward to v6?
>=20
