On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 11:27:46AM -0400, Yakov Shafranovich wrote:
Walter Dnes wrote:
Therefore, I propose that ISPs assign all dynamic IP addresses an rDNS
that includes a recognizable identifying substring such as "dynamic".
There may be adverse side-effects I'm not aware of with total lack of
rDNS. If not, null rDNS would be just as good.
Take a look at the following:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-lorenzen-marid-mxout-00.txt
Keep in mind the following:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-stumpf-dns-mtamark-01.txt
There is also a proposal floated by Phil Hallam Baker expanding on MTA MARK.
Those are in the same universe as a naming standard for dynamically
assigned IP addresses, but not the same thing. I think a dynamic-IP
RDNS naming standard would be a positive thing. It wouldn't
necessarily cure anything, but a reasonable BCP recommendation for
this would encourage providers to adhere to a well-known naming system
for this one specific thing rather than everyone coming up with
something different; and this practice would help others (such
as filter users).
I think the string needs to be a little more formally specified than
just including the substring "dynamic" though-- that's too much of a
common word. If it specifically matched the IP number in some way,
the name could be tested against the IP number to give an assurance
that one has found a self-declared dynamic IP address. e.g., something
like: for any IPv4 IP address canonically represented by a.b.c.d, the
leftmost part of the RDNS name shall match the string "a-b-c-d-dynamic."
mm
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg