[as112-ops] RFC4193 section 4.4

[Aleksi Suhonen]

> On Mon, 27 Dec 2010, Eric Ziegast wrote:
>> Is there any (blasphemous) interest in running a global "c.f.ip6.arpa"
>> or "d.f.ip6.arpa" nameserver as a part of AS112?
>
On 12/28/10 16:50, William F. Maton wrote:
> I've kicked around the idea of pushing out another IETF I-D on the
> subject of delegating more reverse maps to AS112 PLUS junk domains (such
> as those found in certain vendor literature) on the dnsops mailing list
> and there's been a few that expressed support on that. I suspect the
> root operators wouldn't mind seeing some of those loads go as well.

I wouldn't mind seeing for example these zones added:

Teredo and other experimental space:
0.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.arpa
1.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.arpa

RFC5735-6to4-combinations:
0.0.2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa
A.0.2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa
F.7.2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa
E.2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa
F.2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa
(and others, you get the picture)

Obsoleted site local:
c.e.f.ip6.arpa

Compatibility mapped space thingie: (probably no traffic here tho?)
f.f.f.f.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.ip6.arpa

Can we easily make the servers in 192.175.48.0/24 serve these?
Would it really matter if half of them were lame delegations?
Should we add AAAA records for blackhole-1 and blackhole-2?

Or should we create another anycast subnet with blackholes 3 and 4?
The same ASN could still be reused for it.

-- 
	+358 4567 02048 / http://www.trex.fi/
	Aleksi Suhonen / TREX  Tampere Region Exchange Oy