i consider every example in that draft to be implied by the current 2317, and all are in wide use. it's a better-written document, though lacking coverage of some common use cases such as comcast's delegation to my house of a /24.

;; ANSWER SECTION:
1.150.104.24.in-addr.arpa. 3600 IN      CNAME   1.0-255.150.104.24.in-addr.arpa.
1.0-255.150.104.24.in-addr.arpa. 3600 IN PTR    internal.gw1.rits.tisf.net.

the /24 and /16 subdelegation cases follow directly from 2317's claims, even though i had to have this told to me by comcast at the time before i could see that.

i sort of regret $GENERATE, it would be better if the zone did not have to be macro-expanded in this way before it could be axfr'd (or ixfr'd). if i had it to do over again i'd have proposed some kind of RR-encoded metadata to show the desired $GENERATE-like effect. but let's not take that on right now, ok?

so:

Tim Wicinski wrote on 2022-12-08 09:52:

Some time back Tony Finch proposed a 2317bis - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc2317bis-00
which the WG adopted but died for lack of interest.

It would be useful to revise this document

tim
+1, and i'll commit to reviewing it.

--
P Vixie

_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
homenet@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Reply via email to