Moin! Read this draft on the way to the IETF and while saw there was a lot of discussion around it I didn't read all of it, so forgive me if stuff has been said before.
First I think it is good to have a draft that captures what you can do and what the challenges for IPv6 reverse are. However as the discussion on what is the best way to do will never come to an end as people have strong opinions on that we should leave that or the recommendations section out of the draft and just publish it as informational. You could if you want to leave that section in just say that there is no clear way to recommend anything as there are different scenarios that apply to different operators and that everybody has to pick their own poison ;-). One thing I would like to see added is delegating reverse and corresponding forward to CPE (homenet router), but serving it out of the service providers name servers as described in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mglt-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation-04 (full disclosure I am co-author of this). While I like the idea of delegating the naming responsibility to the end user/home I personally don't think it is a good thing for the Internet to generate millions of DNS servers on CPE devices as we already have enough problems with that (http://openresolverproject.org granted different kind of dns server/proxy but I assume hackers will find way to abuse these also). So long -Ralf --- Ralf Weber e: d...@fl1ger.de _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
