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

Jason 'XenoPhage' Frisvold xenophage at godshell.com
Tue Apr 27 19:58:32 CDT 2010


On Apr 27, 2010, at 8:50 PM, Richard Barnes wrote:
> 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?

Presumably the op would only use macros where needed, ie dynamically assigned addresses.  So, for a pool of addresses assigned for DSL/Cable/FIOS subscribers, that pool would have forward/reverse set up.

Note: I am definitely not up on my IPv6 knowledge, so there may be a Really Good Reason(tm) that one should not do this..  However, I was under the impression that having both forward and reverse for dynamic IPs was a best practice..

---------------------------
Jason 'XenoPhage' Frisvold
xenophage at godshell.com
---------------------------
"Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology."
- Niven's Inverse of Clarke's Third Law







More information about the NANOG mailing list