IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] WGLC: "Considerations for the use of DNS Reverse Mapping"

Paul Wouters <paul@xelerance.com> Fri, 28 March 2008 22:59 UTC

Return-Path: <dnsop-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-dnsop-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-dnsop-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BB5D3A68BD; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:59:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.540, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UcRFdgsf25l0; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:59:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4681D3A69C9; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:59:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC6813A69C9 for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:59:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Lds0s+ZGcxDc for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:59:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from newtla.xelerance.com (newtla.xelerance.com [193.110.157.143]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 120423A68BD for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:59:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tla.xelerance.com (tla.xelerance.com [193.110.157.130]) by newtla.xelerance.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AE77C0FF; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 19:08:23 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 19:08:23 -0400
From: Paul Wouters <paul@xelerance.com>
To: JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp>
In-Reply-To: <m2fxualb3y.wl%Jinmei_Tatuya@isc.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0803281906500.17794@newtla.xelerance.com>
References: <20080314034500.GE7553@x27.adm.denic.de> <m2fxualb3y.wl%Jinmei_Tatuya@isc.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: Peter Koch <pk@DENIC.DE>, IETF DNSOP WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] WGLC: "Considerations for the use of DNS Reverse Mapping"
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/dnsop>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: dnsop-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dnsop-bounces@ietf.org

On Fri, 28 Mar 2008, JINMEI Tatuya / ???? wrote:

> Here are my minor comments on the draft:
>
> 1. In Section 1.2
>
>    Starting from a given IPv4 address (possibly the result of a query
>    for an A RR), the term "existing reverse data" means that a query for
>    <reversed-ip4-address>.in-addr.arpa. type PTR results in a response
>    other than Name Error.
>
> I don't think this definition is 100% appropriate.  Consider the case
> where a PTR RR is not provided for <reversed-ip4-address>.in-addr.arpa
> but some other type of RR (e.g. TXT) is.  Then the response to the PTR
> query won't be a Name Error, but it wouldn't be reasonable to consider
> it the existence of reverse data.  I'd suggest revising this to:
>
>    Starting from a given IPv4 address (possibly the result of a query
>    for an A RR), the term "existing reverse data" means that a query for
>    <reversed-ip4-address>.in-addr.arpa. type PTR results in a positive
>    response (i.e,, one that contains a PTR RRset for the queried name
>    in the answer section).

Would it contain these if classless reverse delegations (eg CNAME's) were
used?

Paul
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email