Andrew Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 25/07/2007 03:21:22: > > While we were talking about this issue again this evening, Stephane > also kindly pointed out to me that the document uses the expression > "reverse query" when a more appropriate expression would be "query for > reverse data". So the terminology section could be changed to clean > this up. For instance > > The term "existing reverse data" means that a reverse query for Q > results in a response other than Name Error. > > would become > > The term "existing reverse data" means that a query for reverse > data Q results in a response other than Name Error. > > Does anyone object to making that change, while we're doing another > draft to fix the history? By my count, there are three changes that > have to be made to address this (they'd all be changed in the same way > as the example above). >
It is not really clear to me what Q is in the new text. I suggest removing the letter Q or being more explicit and saying something like Starting from a given IPv4 address (probably the result of a query for an A RR), the term "existing reverse data" means that a query for <reversed-ip4-address>.in-addr.arpa. type PTR results in a response other than Name Error. Starting from a given IPv6 address (probably the result of a query for an AAAA RR), the term "existing reverse data" means that a query for <reversed-ip6-address>.ip6.arpa. type PTR results in a response other than Name Error. The term "matching reverse data" means that the query for existing reverse data resulted in a response containing a set of one or more names which, when each queried themselves in the forward zone for A or AAAA RRs (as appropriate) return one or more results, one of which corresponds to the original query. John ==== John A Dickinson Senior Researcher Nominet UK +44 (0) 1865 332344 _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
