Subject: Re: draft-lewis-dns-wildcard-clarify-00.txt

From: George Michaelson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 04:38:04 +1000

Alain Durand has draft out in V6 contexts mentioning use of wildcard to
make V6 reverse DNS scale better with an autoconfig mechanism. It does say
they are understood to be evil 

-George

draft-ietf-dnsop-ipv6-dns-issues-02.txt 

4. Automatic population of the Reverse path DNS

   Getting the reverse tree DNS populated correctly in IPv4 is not an
   easy exercise and very often the records are not really up to date or
   simply are just not there. As IPv6 addresses are much longer than
   IPv4 addresses, the situation of the reverse tree DNS will probably
   be even worse.

   A fairly common practice from IPv4 ISP is to generate PTR records for
   home customers automatically from the IPv4 address itself. Something
   like:

      1.2.3.4.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR 4.3.2.1.local-ISP.net

   It is not clear today if something similar need to be done in IPv6,
   and, if yes, what is the best approach to this problem.

   As the number of possible PTR records would be huge (2^80) for a /48
   prefix, a possible solution would be to use wildcards entries like:

      *.0.1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.a.b.c.ip6.arpa. IN PTR customer-42.local-
      ISP.net

   However, the use of wildcard is generally discouraged and this may
   not be an acceptable solution.

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>