[146165] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Performance Issues - PTR Records
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tom Lanyon)
Sun Nov 6 21:52:39 2011
From: Tom Lanyon <tom+nanog@oneshoeco.com>
In-Reply-To: <201111070216.pA72Gd7V047900@mail.r-bonomi.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 13:21:29 +1030
To: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 07/11/2011, at 12:46 PM, Robert Bonomi wrote:
>> OK.. let's say you're a DSL provider. Are you going to have your
>> DHCP server populating the forward and reverse DNS? With what, the
>> account holder's name? somename.example.com ?
>=20
> I'll suggest that (a) IF the addresses do migrate among different =
customers
> of the ISP, (b) the addresses handed out are publicly routable, AND =
(c) the
> CPE has to 'authenticate' itself to the head-end, then it is _very_ =
useful=20
> *to*the*ISP* to have dynamically-assigned DNS records of the form:=20
> cust.{accountid}.{locationid}.ISP.{com/net/TLD}
> or something of the sort.
>=20
> Something of that sort can save a -lot- of time/effort in identifying =
the
> customer involved in a complaint.
Surely that's only useful if they're still allocated the address at the =
time of investigating said complaint; a dynamically updating DNS record =
like this is really no substitution for accurate accounting records in =
your RADIUS system.
Tom=
