IPv6 automatic reverse DNS
lguillory at reservetele.com
Sat Oct 29 00:15:40 UTC 2016
Why not have DHCP update dns with both.
Sent from my iPad
Network Operations Manager
Email: lguillory at reservetele.com
100 RTC Dr
Reserve, LA 70084
The information transmitted, including attachments, is intended only for the person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material which should not disseminate, distribute or be copied. Please notify Luke Guillory immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Luke Guillory therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. .
On Oct 28, 2016, at 6:04 PM, Baldur Norddahl <baldur.norddahl at gmail.com> wrote:
> Many service providers have IPv4 reverse DNS for all their IP addresses. If nothing is more relevant, this will often just be the IPv4 address hashed somehow and tagged to the ISP domain name. For some arcane reason it is important to have the forward DNS match the reverse DNS or some mail servers might reject your mails.
> However with IPv6 it is not practical to build such a complete reverse DNS zone. You could do a star entry but that would fail the reverse/forward match test.
> It should be simple to build a DNS server that will automatically generate a hostname value for every reverse lookup received, and also be able to parse that hostname value to return the correct IPv6 address on forward lookups.
> Does any DNS server have that feature? Should we have it? Why not?
> I know of some arguments for:
> 1a) mail servers like it
> 1b) anti spam filters believe in the magic of checking forward/reverse match.
> 2) traceroute will be nicer
> 3) http://ipv6-test.com/ will give me 20/20 instead of 19/20 (yes that was what got me going on this post)
> 4) Output from "who" command on Unix will look nicer (maybe).
More information about the NANOG