Subject: RE: draft-itojun-ipv6-nodeinfo-revlookup-00.txt

From: "Jeroen Massar" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 10:56:06 +0200

[ post by non-subscriber.  with the massive amount of spam, it is easy to
  miss and therefore delete mis-posts.  so fix subscription addresses! ]

[email-masked] wrote:

> >	chairs,
> >	i would like to get some guidance on how to proceed with my
document
> >	draft-itojun-ipv6-nodeinfo-revlookup-00.txt.  i would like to
publish
> >	it as an informational/experimental RFC.  which wg is
appropriate,
> >	or should i pursue it as individual submission?
> >
> >	i understand pushbacks against icmpv6 node information query 
> >	(which should be addressed separately), and against non-DNS name
> >	mapping in general.
> 
> 	just to make sure - i don't mean to replace PTR with 
> it, it can be used together with PTR.  it is an interesting situation 
> if you get answer from both, but anyway...

One application for this could be a reverse dnsserver who doesn't know
the
PTR for a certain IPv6 address it serves the delegation for. It could
then
send this icmp nodeinfo request to the endpoint, which is very probably
quite
close networkwise and use that as a response. Ofcourse it could check
first if
the forward exists and/or that the reverse matches a specified set of
host/domainnames.

Ofcourse this setting depends on the operator of the dns and network.
But IMHO it's easier to implement as it either avoids one to setup a
dhcp
server to update the reverse zone or to distribute the keys for secure
reverse dns updates.

Greets,
 Jeroen

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>