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

At Thu, 3 Apr 2008 22:34:29 -0400,
Andrew Sullivan <ajs@commandprompt.com> wrote:

> > > > 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.

Okay, thanks.  Then I think I can basically agree on this draft on top
of this understanding.  But I'd still like to make several
clarifications and possibly wording changes before publishing it.
I'll try to make these points clearer in subsequent responses.

---
JINMEI, Tatuya
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.From dnsop-bounces@ietf.org  Fri Apr  4 15:38:08 2008
Return-Path: <dnsop-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: dnsop-archive@optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-dnsop-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B63103A69CB;
	Fri,  4 Apr 2008 15:38:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E23928C136
	for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Fri,  4 Apr 2008 15:38:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.6
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5
	tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
	by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id O+9C4fjhdN8x for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>;
	Fri,  4 Apr 2008 15:38:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mon.jinmei.org (mon.jinmei.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:36::162])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9C153A686A
	for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri,  4 Apr 2008 15:38:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhcp-191.sql1.isc.org (unknown
	[IPv6:2001:4f8:3:bb:6828:1d3a:1d4c:ca21])
	by mon.jinmei.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDFDC33C2E;
	Fri,  4 Apr 2008 15:38:13 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2008 15:38:13 -0700
Message-ID: <m2wsndi6ui.wl%Jinmei_Tatuya@isc.org>
From: JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?=
	<Jinmei_Tatuya@isc.org>
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@commandprompt.com>
In-Reply-To: <20080404023428.GA1040@commandprompt.com>
References: <20080314034500.GE7553@x27.adm.denic.de>
	<20080326142252.GA11184@nic.fr>
	<20080329191803.GA362@commandprompt.com>
	<47EEA725.2060807@ca.afilias.info>
	<m2lk3ujqz2.wl%Jinmei_Tatuya@isc.org>
	<20080404023428.GA1040@commandprompt.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) Emacs/22.1 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka")
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] WGLC: "Considerations for the use of DNS
	Reverse	Mapping"
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>,
	<mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: dnsop-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dnsop-bounces@ietf.org

At Thu, 3 Apr 2008 22:34:29 -0400,
Andrew Sullivan <ajs@commandprompt.com> wrote:

> > > > 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.

Okay, thanks.  Then I think I can basically agree on this draft on top
of this understanding.  But I'd still like to make several
clarifications and possibly wording changes before publishing it.
I'll try to make these points clearer in subsequent responses.

---
JINMEI, Tatuya
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop