Re: [Nanog] Re: IPv6 rDNS - how will it be done?

[David Conrad <drc () virtualized org>]

On Apr 27, 2010, at 5:47 PM, Jason 'XenoPhage' Frisvold wrote:
> On Apr 27, 2010, at 8:42 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> > Windows will just populate the reverse zone as needed, if you let
> > it, using dynamic update.  If you have properly deployed BCP 39
> > and have anti-spoofing ingres filtering then you can just let any
> > address from the /48 add/remove PTR records.  Other OS's will
> > follow suite.
>
> Is DDNS really considered to be the end-all answer for this?

Seems it is that or not bothering with reverse anymore.

> It seems we're putting an awful lot of trust in the user when doing this..  I'd rather see some sort of macro 
> expansion in bind/tinydns/etc that would allow a range of addresses to be added.

Hmm. A macro expansion for a /48 would mean 1,208,925,819,614,629,174,706,176 leaves. An interesting stress test for 
name servers... :-).

Slightly more seriously, there have been discussions in the past about doing dynamic synthesis of v6 reverses, but that 
gets icky (particularly if you invoke the dreaded "DNSSEC" curse) and I don't know any production server that actually 
does this now.  Dynamic DNS is probably the least offensive solution if you really want reverses for your v6 nodes.

Regards,
-drc