[Nanog] Re: IPv6 rDNS - how will it be done?

Wed Apr 28 00:50:20 UTC 2010

Naïve question: If you used macro expansion, wouldn't you end up
providing responses for a lot of addresses that aren't in use?  Maybe
that's not a problem?

On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Jason 'XenoPhage' Frisvold
<xenophage at godshell.com> wrote:
> On Apr 27, 2010, at 8:42 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>> Windows will just populate the reverse zone as needed, if you let
>> it, using dynamic update.  If you have properly deployed BCP 39
>> and have anti-spoofing ingres filtering then you can just let any
>> address from the /48 add/remove PTR records.  Other OS's will
>> follow suite.
>
> Is DDNS really considered to be the end-all answer for this?  It seems we're putting an awful lot of trust in the user when doing this..  I'd rather see some sort of macro expansion in bind/tinydns/etc that would allow a range of addresses to be added.
>
>> Alternatively you can delegate the reverse for the /48 to servers
>> run by the customers.
>
> This works for commercial customers, but I'm not sure I'd want to delegate this to a residential customer.
>
>> Mark
>
> ---------------------------
> Jason 'XenoPhage' Frisvold
> xenophage at godshell.com
> ---------------------------
> "Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology."
> - Niven's Inverse of Clarke's Third Law
>
>
>
>
>