> Paul Wouters <p...@nohats.ca> wrote: > > > > I would feel much better if there would be some real use > > csases to justify adding special code to DNS that will > > instantly become obsolete. > > Yes. >
Hi Tony, Thanks for the feedback! > > For IPv4 I can't see what advantage BULK has over $GENERATE > or similar back-end provisioning scripts. > Really? > > For IPv6, if we have any reverse DNS at all for end-user devices > it'll probably be just a wildcard pointing to a placeholder > record identifying the VLAN. > > BULK seems like far too much cleverness applied to far too > small a problem. > In the IPv6 world, the smallest significant network is 18 and some odd quintillion (18,000,000,000,000,000,000) addresses. Think of this as your property (e.g. your yard). Each IP address in itself is small but without the sum of each, what do you have? Suddenly, each blade of grass has value. This is how a customer feels when they are given (sold) address space. Thanks, John > > Tony. > -- > f.anthony.n.finch <d...@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/ - > I xn--zr8h punycode Hebrides, Bailey: Southeast, becoming > cyclonic, 5 to 7, perhaps gale 8 later. > Moderate or rough, occasionally very rough later. Rain or > showers. Good, occasionally poor. > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > > -- THESE ARE THE DROIDS TO WHOM I REFER: This communication is the property of CenturyLink and may contain confidential or privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the communication and any attachments. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
