On Aug 15, 2011, at 10:55 AM, Ted Lemon wrote: > On Aug 15, 2011, at 1:26 AM, Leo Liu(bing) wrote: >> Thanks for the info, that's quite helpful. So can we assume that >> Windows-based DNS systems have been widely deployed rfc3007? > > This is kind of a bizarre conversation. DDNS use is widespread in > environments that support DHCPv4, although it is by no means pervasive. > It's not a Windows thing—it's generally done by DHCP servers, not DHCP > clients. DNS update by clients is somewhat rare, although it is supported > by Windows. Unfortunately Apple has chosen not to support it, but in > practice it's not important because key distribution for DNS updates is such > a big problem that it usually doesn't make sense to do it from end nodes—only > from servers.
I would expect that this is different with http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4862.txt 4862 IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration. S. Thomson, T. Narten, T. Jinmei. September 2007. (Format: TXT=72482 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC2462) (Status: DRAFT STANDARD) http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4941.txt 4941 Privacy Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in IPv6. T. Narten, R. Draves, S. Krishnan. September 2007. (Format: TXT=56699 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC3041) (Status: DRAFT STANDARD) In both cases, the addresses are concocted by the system using them. For RFC 4862, that means "when the system receives a new prefix in an RA". My understanding is that Windows privacy addresses are generated daily and held for a week; I would expect other implementations to do something akin to that. I wouldn't not expect DHCP servers to be doing updates in a world in which the end host calculates its own address. Do we know about that at all? _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
