Subject: [dnsop] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-00.txt

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 11:01:30 +0300 (EEST)

On Tue, 20 Jun 2006, [email-masked] wrote:
> 	Title		: Locally-served Zones
> 	Author(s)	: M. Andrews
> 	Filename	: draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-00.txt
> 	Pages		: 10
> 	Date		: 2006-6-20

As I said before, the draft includes section on RFC 3330 zones (such 
as the broadcast and loopback), but it not in sync with RFC 3330 
and/or does not justify the reason. Most importantly, it's not clear 
why 255.255.255.255.IN-ADDR.ARPA is there instead of the whole 255/8 
or even 240/4.

It is debatable whether any of the others (e.g., 198.18.0.0/15) should 
be on that list.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
.
dnsop resources:_____________________________________________________
web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop.html
mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop/index.html

---

From: Joe Abley <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 09:20:22 -0400

On 4-Jul-2006, at 04:01, Pekka Savola wrote:

> As I said before, the draft includes section on RFC 3330 zones  
> (such as the broadcast and loopback), but it not in sync with RFC  
> 3330 and/or does not justify the reason. Most importantly, it's not  
> clear why 255.255.255.255.IN-ADDR.ARPA is there instead of the  
> whole 255/8 or even 240/4.
>
> It is debatable whether any of the others (e.g., 198.18.0.0/15)  
> should be on that list.

Once those questions have been answered, it seems possible that  
there's some useful crossover between the conclusions reached and  
AS112 ops.

There's no current formal mechanism for the IN-ADDR.ARPA zones  
corresponding to private-use or reserved netblocks to be delegated to  
AS112 servers by the IANA. Perhaps there should be.

Joe

.

---

From: Mark Andrews <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 10:23:23 +1000

> why 255.255.255.255.IN-ADDR.ARPA is there instead of the whole 255/8 

	As far as I am concerned it is perfectly in sync with RFC 3330.

   240.0.0.0/4 - This block, formerly known as the Class E address
   space, is reserved.  The "limited broadcast" destination address
   255.255.255.255 should never be forwarded outside the (sub-)net of
   the source.  The remainder of this space is reserved for future use.
   [RFC1700, page 4]

	The address space is RESERVED not ASSIGNED.  You really do
	not want to put addresses here that have the potential to
	be used on the Internet as a whole.  255.255.255.255 is the
	one address that has been cut out of 240.0.0.0/4.

--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: [email-masked]
.
dnsop resources:_____________________________________________________
web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop.html
mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop/index.html