Re: [DNSOP] missing use case and problem statement for draft-woodworth-bulk-rr

"Woodworth, John R" <John.Woodworth@CenturyLink.com> Sat, 22 July 2017 22:58 UTC

Return-Path: <John.Woodworth@CenturyLink.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20DFE129ADA for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 15:58:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.402
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.402 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xspBHANKR6gt for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 15:58:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lxomp52w.centurylink.com (lxomp52w.centurylink.com [155.70.50.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72015126C7A for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 15:58:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lxomp90v.corp.intranet (lxomp90v.corp.intranet [151.117.203.59]) by lxomp52w.centurylink.com (8.14.8/8.14.8) with ESMTP id v6MMwIQt010658 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sat, 22 Jul 2017 17:58:18 -0500
Received: from lxomp90v.corp.intranet (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lxomp90v.corp.intranet (8.14.8/8.14.8) with ESMTP id v6MMwD3v006247; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 17:58:13 -0500
Received: from lxomp06u.corp.intranet (lxomp81v.corp.intranet [151.117.18.14]) by lxomp90v.corp.intranet (8.14.8/8.14.8) with ESMTP id v6MMwDvd006243 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA256 bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 22 Jul 2017 17:58:13 -0500
Received: from lxomp06u.corp.intranet (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lxomp06u.corp.intranet (8.14.8/8.14.8) with ESMTP id v6MMwCCw063006; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 17:58:12 -0500
Received: from vodcwhubex501.ctl.intranet (vodcwhubex501.ctl.intranet [151.117.206.27]) by lxomp06u.corp.intranet (8.14.8/8.14.8) with ESMTP id v6MMwCnp063003 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Sat, 22 Jul 2017 17:58:12 -0500
Received: from PODCWMBXEX501.ctl.intranet ([169.254.1.120]) by vodcwhubex501.ctl.intranet ([151.117.206.27]) with mapi id 14.03.0339.000; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 17:58:12 -0500
From: "Woodworth, John R" <John.Woodworth@CenturyLink.com>
To: "'Jim Reid'" <jim@rfc1035.com>, Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
CC: dnsop WG <dnsop@ietf.org>, "Woodworth, John R" <John.Woodworth@CenturyLink.com>
Thread-Topic: [DNSOP] missing use case and problem statement for draft-woodworth-bulk-rr
Thread-Index: AQHTAxyykhI9QM+je06sHbLWvDEmLaJgcI4g
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:58:11 +0000
Message-ID: <A05B583C828C614EBAD1DA920D92866BD08247B0@PODCWMBXEX501.ctl.intranet>
References: <alpine.LRH.2.20.1707190347390.10419@ns0.nohats.ca> <20170719215749.2241.qmail@ary.lan> <20170720152559.GD22702@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <F388F80D-AFEA-4AA6-BB14-246C78B22E75@rfc1035.com>
In-Reply-To: <F388F80D-AFEA-4AA6-BB14-246C78B22E75@rfc1035.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [151.117.206.8]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/aUOuR7655UC8SsGcqsQT_M3UcD0>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] missing use case and problem statement for draft-woodworth-bulk-rr
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:58:20 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: DNSOP [mailto:dnsop-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jim Reid
>
> BTW, if there are cases where an ISP’s customers care about
> reverse DNS for their IPv6 addresses, what’s stopping those
> customer devices using dynamic update to provision their names
> or have the DHCP server do that for them? Why can’t the ISP's
> provisioning systems and tools spit out PTR records for the IP
> addresses which need this secret sauce?
>

Hi Jim,

Thanks for your comments.

How exactly does a hide-the-body scheme solve the issue?  Do we
really want a /64 to be dynamically updated because we shift the
problem back to them?

We've actually had requests narrowed to a simple /96 to help with
their problem, as if shrinking their request to simply the equivalent
of the IPv4 Internet would help :) .

Other providers are more than willing to bestow a solution to
our customers today, *actually* polluting DNS with all the doomsday
fears you're touting becoming fulfilled.

Why wouldn't we want to take the opportunity to take this on as a
community and guide it the way we want, within the boundaries we set,
and with the standards support (DNSSEC, etc.) we want to promote?


Thanks,
John

>
-- THESE ARE THE DROIDS TO WHOM I REFER:
This communication is the property of CenturyLink and may contain confidential or privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the communication and any attachments.