Re: [DNSOP] A practical solution for ISP-level support of the reverse DNS tree for IPv6

2009-09-07 Thread Mark Andrews
In message , Ted Lemon writes : > On Sep 7, 2009, at 6:52 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: > > /56 should be typical for homes > > /48 should be typical for businesses > > I don't think this is germane to the discussion. My point in > mentioning /64 was simply that if you go narrower than that

Re: [DNSOP] A practical solution for ISP-level support of the reverse DNS tree for IPv6

2009-09-07 Thread Ted Lemon
On Sep 7, 2009, at 6:52 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: /56 should be typical for homes /48 should be typical for businesses I don't think this is germane to the discussion. My point in mentioning /64 was simply that if you go narrower than that, important things break, so it's a

Re: [DNSOP] A practical solution for ISP-level support of the reverse DNS tree for IPv6

2009-09-07 Thread Mark Andrews
In message <63fd8b00-b74f-465e-95c8-129a69f52...@nominum.com>, Ted Lemon writes : > On Sep 3, 2009, at 6:37 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: > > First what DoS that doesn't exist today? Updates already get sent > > to the ISP's {IN-ADDR,IP6}.ARPA servers. > > If you do prefix delegation, you're delegatin

Re: [DNSOP] A practical solution for ISP-level support of the reverse DNS tree for IPv6

2009-09-07 Thread Ted Lemon
On Sep 3, 2009, at 3:37 PM, Lee Howard wrote: I agree that I don't like this answer, and I think I said that in the draft, for exactly those reasons. If this draft is worth pursuing but you think section 3 is unclear, could you help me improve it? The problem with section 3 is that aside f

Re: [DNSOP] A practical solution for ISP-level support of the reverse DNS tree for IPv6

2009-09-07 Thread Ted Lemon
On Sep 3, 2009, at 6:37 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: First what DoS that doesn't exist today? Updates already get sent to the ISP's {IN-ADDR,IP6}.ARPA servers. If you do prefix delegation, you're delegating typically 64 bits of address space. If you allow your customer to do arbitrary DNS upd

Re: [DNSOP] A practical solution for ISP-level support of the reverse DNS tree for IPv6

2009-09-03 Thread Mark Andrews
In message , Ted Lemon writes : > On Sep 3, 2009, at 11:58 AM, Lee Howard wrote: > > Education needed: how do you tell a residential user what server > > will accept their dynamic PTR updates? > > I think this is an unnecessarily difficult answer. Maintaining the > zones at the ISP is a reci

Re: [DNSOP] A practical solution for ISP-level support of the reverse DNS tree for IPv6

2009-09-03 Thread Lee Howard
> -Original Message- > From: dnsop-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:dnsop-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ted Lemon > Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 1:05 PM > To: Lee Howard > Cc: 'dnsop' > Subject: [DNSOP] A practical solution for ISP-level support of the reverse

[DNSOP] A practical solution for ISP-level support of the reverse DNS tree for IPv6

2009-09-03 Thread Ted Lemon
On Sep 3, 2009, at 11:58 AM, Lee Howard wrote: Education needed: how do you tell a residential user what server will accept their dynamic PTR updates? I think this is an unnecessarily difficult answer. Maintaining the zones at the ISP is a recipe for DoS attacks, bad configuration, angry