A crazy idea

Michael Loftis mloftis at wgops.com
Tue Jul 20 13:48:21 UTC 2021

(Reply in-line)

On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 06:11 Stephen Satchell <list at satchell.net> wrote:

> First, I know this isn't the right place to propose this; need a pointer
> to where to propose an outlandish idea.
> PROBLEM:  IPv6 support is still in its birthing pangs.  I see a problem
> that limits deployment of IPv6 fully:  reverse PTR records in the
> ".in6.arpa." zones.
> (Now that I think about it, this may very well be a network operator
> issue.  Who maintains the ".in.arpa." zones delegated by IANA now?)
> I've been going 'round and 'round with AT&T about "static" IPv6
> addresses.  In particular, I can't get a PTR record in the ip6.arpa.
> zone to save my life.  Now, the problem is not really ripe yet, because
> the big reason for PTR records is for mail servers -- best practice
> calls for AAAA/PTR agreement, just like for IPv4 the best practice is
> for A/PTR agreement.
> The existing DNS providers can support delegation domains, so that I
> don't have to have DNS servers of my own if I don't want to.  It could
> be that one would need to "buy" the delegation domain, but that's a
> front-office consideration.  Personally, I use register.com for my
> domain DNS zones.  I believe strongly that other registrars that offer
> customer zone editing, plus DNS service providers, can support reverse
> delegation zones with a minimum of hassle, and without charging an arm
> and a leg for the service.

They’re not a DNS service provider. That is a registrar. Providing
authoritative DNS is incidental to their business and not their focus. Go
look for managed DNS or authoritative DNS services. There’s still the
problem of getting the  delegation which is largely unsupported for
consumer IP services. And honestly…I don’t really expect consumer (dynamic)
IP services to provide reverse delegation.  Business (definitely needs to)
and static IP services (really should) should provide either delegation of
the reverse zone or PTRs for non boundary ipv4 space per RFC2317.

 From the customers' viewpoint, a GUI would make the maintenance
> relatively painless.
> (Keying the information below took a long time.  Any rational DNS admin
> and DNS service provider would have automation in place to take out the
> painful work.)


>  > 96- NS my-DNS-server-1
>  > 96- NS my-DNS-server-2> $GENERATE 96-102 $
> IN CNAME $.96-
> In my BIND9 zone file, it would look something like this:
> > $ORIGIN 96-
> > @ SOA ...
> > @ NS my-dns-server-1.
> > @ NS my-dns-server-2.
> > 96 IN PTR server1.example.com.
> > 97 IN PTR server2.example.com.

See RFC2317.

> The advantage to this system to the number providers is they would have
> one administrative record per customer, instead of having to deal with
> each PTR record individually.  The advantage to customers is they don't
> have to beg and snivel to get PTR records, just beg and snivel once to
> get the delegation.  The advantage to DNS server providers is they have
> something else to sell.
> Want to encourage IPv6 adoption?  This would help.

> --

"Genius might be described as a supreme capacity for getting its possessors
into trouble of all kinds."
-- Samuel Butler
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20210720/11f2c3bb/attachment.html>

More information about the NANOG mailing list