[166137] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: comcast ipv6 PTR
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joe Abley)
Wed Oct 9 13:30:15 2013
From: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
In-Reply-To: <20131009171016.GB3079@cmadams.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 10:29:46 -0700
To: Chris Adams <cma@cmadams.net>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 2013-10-09, at 10:10, Chris Adams <cma@cmadams.net> wrote:
> Once upon a time, Blair Trosper <blair.trosper@gmail.com> said:
>> True, but the location information, at least the state, is =
quasi-helpful.
>=20
> That's another good reason to have reverse records for defined router
> interfaces. Auto-generated reverse for eveything doesn't give any
> useful info though.
If people really want to use generic reverse names and have realised =
that the v6 address space is much too big for $GENERATE, one approach is =
to delegate the appropriate zones to a custom nameserver that can =
auto-generate PTRs on demand. There are scaling problems here, but =
probably nothing that can't be fixed with high TTLs and multiple =
nameservers.
If I was doing that, my instinct would be to code against Ray Bellis' =
evldns (see <http://code.google.com/p/evldns/>).
Note that I'm not suggesting that auto-generated v6 PTRs (or v4 PTRs) =
are a good idea. But I'm aware that a lack of reverse DNS on either =
protocol can make the helpdesk phone ring, so there is certainly a =
pragmatic argument in favour of it.
Joe=
