[dns-operations] IPv6 PTR best practice

[Grant Taylor]

On 05/09/2018 01:27 AM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> Which is in part because there haven’t been enough global addresses 
> to make getting forwards zones useful.  IPv6 changes that.

Is the number of globally routed addresses really the problem here?

IMHO, the IPv{4,6} IP address that an ISP customer uses falls in one of 
two categories:

1) Static (or sticky) which should include proper Reverse DNS reflecting 
the customer.  Including the customer's corresponding Forward DNS.
2) dynamic which likely means that the Reverse DNS (and Forward DNS) 
should reflect the ISP and not the customer.

I posit that #2 applies equally to IPv4 and IPv6, thus the number of 
globally routed addresses is not /this/ problem.

More to point #2, it is possible to make Reverse DNS reflect the name 
the client provided (to some degree), but that possibility does not mean 
that it's the proper thing to do.  Especially in light of the fact that 
supercalifragilistic.local will extremely likely never have proper 
Forward DNS outside of the LAN where it's in use.  (Save for an 
extremely unlikely name collision in another LAN.)



-- 
Grant. . . .
unix || die

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3982 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <https://lists.dns-oarc.net/pipermail/dns-operations/attachments/20180509/4a16c47b/attachment.bin>