IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] The DNSOP WG has placed draft-woodworth-bulk-rr in state "Candidate for WG Adoption"

Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> Wed, 19 July 2017 17:39 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@redbarn.org>
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 9640012EC37 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 10:39:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 U7w2HnpJgOEn for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 10:39:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from family.redbarn.org (family.redbarn.org [IPv6:2001:559:8000:cd::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46C9C12EBF4 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 10:39:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:559:8000:c9:ddec:eba0:a2ac:63c3] (unknown [IPv6:2001:559:8000:c9:ddec:eba0:a2ac:63c3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by family.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ED3BC61FF3; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 17:39:22 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <596F994A.9050202@redbarn.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 10:39:22 -0700
From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
User-Agent: Postbox 5.0.15 (Windows/20170609)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: sthaug@nethelp.no
CC: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1707191023090.27210@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk> <A05B583C828C614EBAD1DA920D92866BD081C441@PODCWMBXEX501.ctl.intranet> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1707191137260.27210@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk> <20170719.131159.74748443.sthaug@nethelp.no>
In-Reply-To: <20170719.131159.74748443.sthaug@nethelp.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/gr6aqOjp6cHc9ouGHg9C-93XCMY>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] The DNSOP WG has placed draft-woodworth-bulk-rr in state "Candidate for WG Adoption"
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: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 17:39:25 -0000


sthaug@nethelp.no wrote:
>> Can you provide a technical reason for per-address IPv6 reverse DNS?
>>
>> Where I work, we bulk populate reverse v4 DHCP pools just so we know that
>> they are pools. We aren't going to bother doing that with v6 because
>> everything is a pool, except for a relatively small number of statically
>> configured switches and servers and suchlike.
>
> Much the same here. The only IPv6 addresses getting reverse DNS will
> be statically configured addresses.

ty, ty, ty!

see also this, from 2011:

http://www.circleid.com/posts/20110607_two_stage_filtering_for_ipv6_electronic_mail/

-- 
P Vixie

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email