[DNSOP] AD review of draft-ietf-dnsop-isp-ip6rdns

Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> Fri, 24 August 2018 21:02 UTC

Return-Path: <warren@kumari.net>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6214E130DE9 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 14:02:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.909
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6Ae2yjOYIPj0 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 14:02:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x42a.google.com (mail-wr1-x42a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20C50130DC0 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 14:02:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x42a.google.com with SMTP id v90-v6so8507468wrc.0 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 14:02:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=gaXbBsgKhuLBN1U3jWV+BBZ1v+DC41EC/BpgIg7bCS4=; b=XPY24lwC8YJWjZV8+brY86CBWIzfCEvZCfcRzE3y/62uZjI0nWeWMakbA6HkbUy+mw VsQQnd0cTN83TE7vD4nnkZiwQCiBNI48mvtgQkUfCHTEX1L0rEfw0ox9bS28s/127beK o8YFkN/1S/f0HxgRDmcAHzITN3IAhM8R7ui7qnqNsloKThEbgJP/V4X3nWUlbdzKkzK1 MoVz1tZS2vvfTaS9MADhf6FFFbkWY1Iky5v3nwWGXqsvUa6mibAyc1LYC2H/lvUjPVLX RpwkdU7IR+2gw1e+GIgFpO10UjAgzHpG3uKwBYvmBO6d10QX9G12T/3FxvIjvuf1Rtva yzWQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=gaXbBsgKhuLBN1U3jWV+BBZ1v+DC41EC/BpgIg7bCS4=; b=dpOOI9tOvhuStC96rX9+jWzTlFWsxOwzV7RLpwPS9tTjD5fQkSjsiM6tH5Jvjyh4Bb Hey25XtN/nSc6MrAvezhywVVMA6wS+wRAvAHKmKYNtnCzs1mMPlFR2jK5B2effN+Daxc +2aPg/xA2Vw29Z/MB2x6EdpCSY6YgKfsDBUVcpgv3Q6VeyvA5JfyuMDgsrzrEv0+opSC /W2Pa8JBnlYvJZ+hM7HbN2NP3oUIn6PeFEsWCyTo7J0qUoO0NqwKhUiyGAuUwjb+V7iI QJu1S5awtrSzN5Ya18bgtAtSjmbTdCAaAMuWkeSA3C3amD+VaIppvvb4JEodJi0Z8bl0 18sQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51DRAxylL5/NS178P1Xr4v1tpHmr9uk8D+/6uw5W5aeR4ZjNalDY eh/AC7hChERQVs9F1ZA/eors9WAumJJwI3MD9K9gGbAWg5s=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0Vdak7JkF8uRIslIY5Q3u/mOVxPWIhyaUCdcDk9AZtjo23A+23qd837xMQs7r2iDTgF9KRkXgFCy3cB3rU8rm4Wk=
X-Received: by 2002:adf:c454:: with SMTP id a20-v6mr2179579wrg.20.1535144526754; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 14:02:06 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 17:01:30 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHw9_iJK=kAhudjYqGwV+QZCwoMzFL39A7b4_f183Xr1TWV-KA@mail.gmail.com>
To: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-dnsop-isp-ip6rdns@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000324d7d057434b019"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/haiqvDqtpp1RV_94Qmi5OvnGKGA>
Subject: [DNSOP] AD review of draft-ietf-dnsop-isp-ip6rdns
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 21:02:13 -0000

AD Review of "Reverse DNS in IPv6 for Internet Service Providers"

Apologies for how long it has taken to do this review; I had a few,
primarily editorial notes on this document - while they are mainly
editorial / nits, addressing them now will prevent (well, minimize :-))
issues later in the process.

Section: Abstract

   In IPv4, Internet Service Providers (ISPs) commonly provide IN-
   ADDR.ARPA information for their customers by prepopulating the zone
   with one PTR record for every available address.  This practice does
   not scale in IPv6.  This document analyzes different approaches and
   considerations for ISPs in managing the ip6.arpa zone for IPv6
   address space assigned to many customers.

 Q1: It it intentional that IN-ADDR.ARPA is uppercase, and ip6.arpa is

 Q2: ... "managing the ip6.arpa zone for IPv6 address space assigned to
many customers."
The "assigned to many customers" bit reads oddly to me - does it add
anything? Could it just be "for their IPv6 space" instead? Or just drop the

Section 1.1:  Reverse DNS in IPv4

"For instance, if an ISP Example.com aggregated at a network hub in Town in the province of AnyWhere,
the reverse zone might look like:  IN PTR 1.string.region.example.com."

Q3: Was the Town, AnyWhere bit supposed to be referenced ?  Perhaps:

Section 1.2.  Reverse DNS Considerations in IPv6
"Since 2^^80 possible addresses could be configured in an example
2001:db8:f00/48 zone alone, even with automation ..."

Q4: The "in an example 2001:db8:f00/48 zone" is confusing to me - this
makes it sound like the example / prefix is in some what special - this is
true for any /48. Can the prefix bit be dropped? Or this reworded?

Q5: This document uses DNSsec - I believe that the standard capitalization


I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in
the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of