[67546] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 reverse lookup - lame delegation?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Vixie)
Wed Feb 11 17:12:43 2004
From: Paul Vixie <paul@vix.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: Message from itojun@itojun.org (Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino)
of "Thu, 12 Feb 2004 07:07:17 +0900."
<20040211220717.3B806F7@coconut.itojun.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 22:11:57 +0000
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
[itojun]
> i understand some implementation (BIND 9.3?) does this,
i think it's all bind9, but certainly all bind 9.2 and later.
> but is the behavior documented somewhere in the set of RFCs?
yes. marka just quoted all of that.
> for instance, does djbdns do it? does MS DNS server do it?
>
> i'm very skeptical about the possibility (or reality) of DNAME-based
> transition.
as a practical matter, it is impossible to ensure that all name servers
and resolvers understand DNAME. but it is very possible to ensure that
a given zone, such as "8.f.4.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.arpa" in ISC's case, is only
served by authority servers who understand DNAME and do CNAME synthesis.
therefore it is very practical to consider a DNAME-based transition.
