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

On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 07:25:53PM -0700, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote:

> address.  So, it's not "in use within a range, and referenced in a
> forward mapping".  Does this mean this address is not covered by the
> above sentence of Section 4.2?

Right, it is not.

> > > or something else?  In either case, does this mean we don't have to
> > > provide reverse mappings for addresses that are NOT referenced in a
> > > forward mapping?
> > 
> > No.  We added this text exactly to address your previous objection
> > that the text appeared to be requiring that every IP address anybody
> > uses has to have a reverse map, which is absurd since every IP address
> > in use doesn't need to have a forward map.
> 
> I'm still not sure...The "No" seems to say this temporary address is
> still covered by this sentence, but the following sentence seems to
> indicate the opposite.

Sorry, I see the problem now with my response.  No, the temporary
address does not need to have a reverse mapping, for exactly the same
reason that it does not need a forward one.

I will attempt to come up with a sentence that makes this clearer,
given that it obviously isn't so far.

Best regards,

A
-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@commandprompt.com
+1 503 667 4564 x104
http://www.commandprompt.com/
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop