IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] New Version Notification for draft-gersch-dnsop-revdns-cidr-00.txt

Joseph Gersch <joe.gersch@secure64.com> Thu, 31 May 2012 21:51 UTC

Return-Path: <joe.gersch@secure64.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 3842321F864C for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 May 2012 14:51:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.495
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.495 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JYuyrkhl96lu for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 May 2012 14:51:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zimbra.secure64.com (unknown [64.92.221.189]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23C0E21F864A for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 31 May 2012 14:51:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.secure64.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F04EB8652; Thu, 31 May 2012 15:51:06 -0600 (MDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at secure64.com
Received: from zimbra.secure64.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.secure64.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9KjDhxsKQEGb; Thu, 31 May 2012 15:51:05 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from [129.82.138.211] (unknown [129.82.138.211]) by zimbra.secure64.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 128C2B84E2; Thu, 31 May 2012 15:51:05 -0600 (MDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=secure64.com; s=2010; t=1338501065; bh=KQvrhEFnt1+k7+CjGZVIBlshb/ecInaghsWsqxbKZJw=; h=Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=Us7eHTh9kTR9 xYWTsPS2J5wkXBZCRj4ZmhArBaYWJJ6QTi5ak5+nRkc9GwbCE3+v6l18ezIxblDOKTc 4vaevYKE57XtK180b+xOTe74akHM7U+TuhQuu7Urb0lffh4dlBqnnO7r+S9a/Q8RE/Y FIDTQs3kd7kboIKRWxCUxG8+Y=
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
From: Joseph Gersch <joe.gersch@secure64.com>
In-Reply-To: <2C012FE1-A40D-473F-89D8-52673182A581@nominet.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 15:51:04 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <C9112AAD-8487-4287-B7E3-94A02E83F6FE@secure64.com>
References: <20120217000918.22307.43753.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2D04DB88-9570-4DE3-A796-F4F07AF5EF74@secure64.com> <017101ccefd5$51790560$f46b1020$@lampo@eurid.eu> <C21F43CF-9CA9-4A40-A7CC-463C5139F362@secure64.com> <E2FDD0E1-9C08-43C4-967E-1AE9102D817E@nic.cz> <2C012FE1-A40D-473F-89D8-52673182A581@nominet.org.uk>
To: Ray Bellis <Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257)
Cc: Ondřej Surý <ondrej.sury@nic.cz>, "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] New Version Notification for draft-gersch-dnsop-revdns-cidr-00.txt
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 31 May 2012 21:51:08 -0000

Ray and Ondrej, 
   Dan Massey and I have been busy putting together a presentation for NANOG which is in Vancouver next week.  We plan on having many discussions with operators and designers there.  After we get enough feedback, we will get back to you.  I know this is later than you wanted, but we want to get good discussion first. 
 - Joe

On Mar 30, 2012, at 4:19 AM, Ray Bellis wrote:

> 
> On 30 Mar 2012, at 12:09, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> 
>> Hi Joseph,
>> 
>> since I am not sure if you understood my point (I am not sure if I was able
>> to understand it myself :), I am summarizing it to the mailing list.
>> 
>> I like the direction of your work, but I miss a way how to put more stuff under
>> the named prefix.
>> 
>> I would like you to update RFC2317 together with your document, so the end
>> customers don't have two distinct trees in their DNS infrastructure.
> 
> +1
> 
>> F.e. if I have 1.0.m.82.129.in-addr.arpa prefix in the DNS and I have delegate
>> it to the customer, how do I put my PTRs in?  The block owner would still have
>> to delegate another "dummy" prefix with CNAMEs and you have to handle it in
>> separate zone.
>> 
>> BTW one more observation.  Since you don't have to do any zone cuts in the binary
>> part, why not merge them into just one label?  E.g. something like 10.m.82.129.in-addr.arpa or 10001101.m.82.129.in-addr.arpa.
> 
> With the current scheme it's possible to delegate longer prefixes, and this is a necessary feature.
> 
> The stuff Dan was saying about two alternate representations concerns me, though.  As written, by default:
> 
>  192.168.64/18 is 1.0.m.168.192
> 
> but
> 
>  192.168.64/24 is 64.168.192
> 
> which is not a sub-domain of the enclosing /18 representation.
> 
> This way lies dragons, I think...
> 
> Ray
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Joseph Gersch
Chief Operating Officer
Secure64 Software Corporation

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email