[67539] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 reverse lookup - lame delegation?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Vixie)
Wed Feb 11 15:56:31 2004
To: nanog@merit.edu
From: Paul Vixie <vixie@vix.com>
Date: 11 Feb 2004 20:55:54 +0000
In-Reply-To: <a06020400bc4fe9ddd41d@[192.136.136.41]>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
edlewis@arin.net (Edward Lewis) writes:
> ...
> DNAME was kind of the "third record in." The change in it's "status"
> pertained to the role it played in supporting bit sting labels -
> which is why the "reverse tree" is mentioned in the deprecation.
> Looking at the document now, the document ought to have read "the use
> of DNAME RRs in the support of bit string labels is deprecated" -
> based on my memory.
I wasn't there, but that's what the meeting notes seem to say, and that's
what the people who were there all seem to agree on. Not that it matters;
the type is defined and at least one authority server implementation will
synthesize protocol-compliant CNAME RRs in the presence of DNAMEs, and so
the approach documented at www.isc.org/pubs/tn/ will universally work OK.
--
Paul Vixie
