On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 10:32:28AM -0800, Doug Otis wrote:
Note that there has been work in DNSOP suggesting that rejecting on
the failure of reverse DNS lookup is not always a good idea.
Agreed.
Just to be clear: I am not sure I agree with those who think reverse
DNS should not be maintained, but there were strong currents in the WG
that led to the text of that I-D as it stands. It isn't clear to me
where the I-D stands in its progression (if there is to be any) from
the WG, so I have no idea what the Chairs will say was consensus. But
there was a WGLC in which at least some people suggested the text of
draft-ietf-dnsop-reverse-mapping-considerations-06.txt still contained
too much endorsement of the reverse tree. My personal interpretation
of those remarks is that there will always be a hard core of operators
who regard the reverse tree as an insupportable burden (without
consideration for the v4/v6 differences).
A
--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs(_at_)shinkuro(_dot_)com
Shinkuro, Inc.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf