SORBS Contact

Wed Aug 9 23:55:04 UTC 2006

I'll post this back to NANOG as others are likely to comment similar ways...

Michael J Wise wrote:
> On Aug 9, 2006, at 1:06 PM, Matthew Sullivan wrote:
>
>> This is also why I took the time to create:
>>
>>     <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-msullivan-dnsop-generic-naming-schemes-00.txt> 
>>
>
> Seems like it specifies a bit TOO much detail, but.
This is why it says that it is a suggestion and indicated that the level 
of detail you choose to use is upto you, however if you adopt some of 
the more specific detail you should use the less specific detail.

ie if you follow it you should as a minimum specify static/dynamic.  If 
you want to add more detail like service type, that is your choice, but 
you shouldn't specify the service types (eg wifi) without specifying 
static/dynamic (does that make sense?).

Also it should be noted that it is a 'suggested naming scheme for 
generic records' and therefore not intended to be mandatory, further it 
says you should indicate the hostname of the machine in preference to 
generic records.

The idea being a common but extensible naming scheme for organisations 
want to specify generic/generated records rather than go to the hassle 
of creating individual records for each customer/host.

Regards,

Mat