On 06/02/2017 16:18, Suzanne Woolf wrote:
>> Yes, that's right, with the caveat that all existing locally >> served zones are in the reverse space - there's no forward zones >> registered (yet). > > Could you clarify why that’s relevant? > > Does it just come down to the assumption that reverse zones are not > supposed to have human-visible/human-friendly names? Or is there some > other characteristic of how those names are used that’s important > here? In the back of my mind I was recalling some conversations I've heard that perhaps some other "reserved" forward names should be treated like locally served zones (e.g. ".invalid") but currently aren't. Ray _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
