nanog mailing list archives
Re: comcast ipv6 PTR
From: "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood () cable comcast com>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 17:54:52 +0000
On 10/9/13 12:52 PM, "Blair Trosper" <blair.trosper () gmail com> wrote:
That's essentially what I'm getting at. If the v6 addresses/blocks are allocated in a similar fashion to IPv4, where the octets are clearly named by state and "hsd1", then I don't see why they should lack PTR.
With the small # of IPv4 addresses, generating PTRs was not a big deal. That is not the case for IPv6 and I believe most large scale network operators would agree with that.
However, even if they're not assigned or delegated in that way, it'd be helpful to have SOME form of PTR on there.
Helpful for what, precisely? Jason
Current thread:
- Re: comcast ipv6 PTR, (continued)
- Re: comcast ipv6 PTR Barry Shein (Oct 15)
- Re: comcast ipv6 PTR Doug Barton (Oct 15)
- Re: comcast ipv6 PTR Bjørn Mork (Oct 15)
- Re: comcast ipv6 PTR Brielle Bruns (Oct 15)
- Re: comcast ipv6 PTR Brielle Bruns (Oct 15)
- Re: comcast ipv6 PTR Bjørn Mork (Oct 15)
- Re: comcast ipv6 PTR James Cloos (Oct 17)
- Re: comcast ipv6 PTR Mark Andrews (Oct 09)
- Re: comcast ipv6 PTR Barry Shein (Oct 09)
- Re: comcast ipv6 PTR Blair Trosper (Oct 09)
- Re: comcast ipv6 PTR Livingood, Jason (Oct 09)
- Re: comcast ipv6 PTR Constantine A. Murenin (Oct 09)
- Re: comcast ipv6 PTR Chris Adams (Oct 09)
- Re: comcast ipv6 PTR Ted Cooper (Oct 09)