Ted Lemon <[email protected]> wrote: > On May 5, 2021, at 11:44 AM, Michael Richardson <[email protected]> > wrote: >> The end user might suffer slightly by having locally served reverse >> names that are no longer connected: they should obsolete that zone >> when they realize that their PD hasn't been renewed, until such time, >> (if it was a flash renumber), they would be right to think that they >> legitimately control them.
> In practice I don’t think this is an issue. The reverse lookup is
> usually triggered by receipt of a message from an IP address, so as
> long as the IP address is still in use internally, the presence of the
> reverse zone is wanted. When the address changes, the old zone becomes
> obsolete whether it continues to be served or not. The likelihood of
> the zone being re-allocated to some other network for which the
> original network will then do a reverse lookup is very small, so I
> don’t think there’s any reason to be concerned about this.
I agree with you completely.
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
