Re: Performance Issues - PTR Records

[Leigh Porter <leigh.porter () ukbroadband com>]

On 7 Nov 2011, at 13:48, "sthaug () nethelp no" <sthaug () nethelp no> wrote:

> > > The practice of filling out the reverse zone with fake PTR record
> > > started before there was wide spread support for UPDATE/DNS.  There
> > > isn't any need for this to be done anymore.  Machines are capable
> > > of adding records for themselves.
> >
> > How do I setup this for DHCPv6-PD?  Say, I delegate 2001:db8:42::/48 to
> > the end user.  Should I delegate reverse DNS as well?  If so, to whom?
> >
> > Or is it the CPEs responibility to dynamically add records for whatever
> > addresses it sees on the internal LAN(s)?  Are there CPEs capable of
> > doing this?
> >
> > Or will the end systems themselves do the update against my DNS server?
> > If so, how do I authenticate that?
>
> With my ISP hat on, I find the idea of customer CPEs updating their
> own PTR records to be completely unacceptable. So I guess I'll either
> live without the reverse DNS, or use a name server that can synthesize
> answers on the fly.
>
> Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug () nethelp no

Indeed, there is no way I would allow that either. But really, providing a reverse zone and forward zone to match is a 
case of five minutes and a shell script or a DNS that as Steinar said, will synthesise results.

It's really not all that difficult..

--
Leigh Porter

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
______________________________________________________________________