[...] the status of DNSxL notation for IPv6.
What would make sense, and what not? What has already been tried?
Well, I run a semi-private DNSBL myself ("private" because I don't
document it and the listing/delisting criteria are basically "whatever
I feel like", but "semi-" because it *is* available in the public DNS
for anyone to query who's crazy enough to want to).
For IPv6, I use reversed-nibble notation, basically taking the syntax
used for rDNS lookups, ripping off the .ip6.arpa, and slapping on the
appropriate DNSBL domain. It works for me.
Besides the bandwidth argument (is this a valid argument?)
I don't think so. Reversed-nibble takes 64 bytes of DNS packet
contents (alternating length bytes and nibble-in-ASCII-hex bytes); I
don't consider this large enough to be an issue, especially since it
will normally occur only once per packet, even if multiple records are
returned, thanks to name compression.
/~\ The ASCII der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML
mouse(_at_)rodents(_dot_)montreal(_dot_)qc(_dot_)ca
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg