Subject: [DNSOP] I-D Action:draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-ops-03.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 18:30:01 -0700 (PDT)

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : AS112 Nameserver Operations
	Author(s)       : J. Abley, W. Maton
	Filename        : draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-ops-03.txt
	Pages           : 23
	Date            : 2009-10-05

Many sites connected to the Internet make use of IPv4 addresses which
are not globally unique.  Examples are the addresses designated in
RFC1918 for private use within individual sites.

Devices in such environments may occasionally originate reverse DNS
queries corresponding to those private-use addresses.  Since the
addresses concerned have only local significance, it is good practice
for site administrators to ensure that they are answered locally.
However, it is not uncommon for such queries to follow the normal
delegation path in the public DNS instead of being answered within
the site.

It is not possible for public DNS servers to give useful answers to
such queries.  In addition, due to the wide deployment of private-use
addresses and the continuing growth of the Internet, the volume of
such queries is large and growing.  The AS112 project aims to provide
a distributed sink for such queries in order to reduce the load on
the root and IN-ADDR.ARPA authority servers.

This document describes the steps required to install a new AS112
node, and offers advice relating to such a node's operation.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-ops-03.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

---

From: Chris Hills <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 18:13:20 +0200

> RFC1918 for private use within individual sites.

Should this be extended to include RFC4193 unique local ipv6 unicast
addresses (i.e. [cd].f.ip6.arpa.)?

---

From: Joe Abley <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 17:44:34 +0100

> addresses (i.e. [cd].f.ip6.arpa.)?

I seem to remember having that discussion a long time ago, maybe in  
concert with discussion of marka's local-zones draft.

I believe the consensus at the time was that we didn't have a good  
mechanism for adding delegations to as112 servers.

If this is something that the wg as a whole has started to think is  
worth working on, I could donate some cycles.

Joe

---

From: Mark Andrews <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 09:23:46 +1100

In message <[email-masked]>, Joe Abley writes
> concert with discussion of marka's local-zones draft.

And for D.F.IP6.ARPA we already have a RFC which recommends that
nameservers automatically answer for this zone so it is not waiting
for the local-zones draft.

For C.F.IP6.ARPA that can wait until we decide what is actually to
be done in that space.  It's reserved but not in use.

If the f.ip6.arpa server operators see excessive amounts of queries
for these zone then we should look at as112 techniques otherwise I
would just leave it to the built in empty zones to absorb the traffic.

Mark

; <<>> DiG 9.3.6-P1 <<>> soa d.f.ip6.arpa
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 20190
;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;d.f.ip6.arpa.			IN	SOA

;; ANSWER SECTION:
d.f.ip6.arpa.		86400	IN	SOA	d.f.ip6.arpa. . 0 28800 7200 604800 86400

;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
d.f.ip6.arpa.		0	IN	NS	d.f.ip6.arpa.

;; Query time: 0 msec
;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1)
;; WHEN: Fri Oct  9 09:08:05 2009
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 79

> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: [email-masked]

---

From: "William F. Maton Sotomayor" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 13:16:52 -0400 (EDT)

On Thu, 8 Oct 2009, Joe Abley wrote:

> I seem to remember having that discussion a long time ago, maybe in concert 
> with discussion of marka's local-zones draft.

It was the Prague IETF in March 2007.  Meeting notes posted here:

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsop/current/msg05449.html

> I believe the consensus at the time was that we didn't have a good mechanism 
> for adding delegations to as112 servers.

Right.  That's going way back before when there were some muttering about 
having a third document cover an add/drop mechanism for zones to be dealt 
with.  It was at that point that both the third document idea was dropped.

> If this is something that the wg as a whole has started to think is worth 
> working on, I could donate some cycles.

+1

wfms

---

From: "William F. Maton Sotomayor" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 12:26:15 -0400 (EDT)

> addresses (i.e. [cd].f.ip6.arpa.)?

An argument could be made for the inclusion of that, plus one could also 
argue that perhaps the time has come to have AS112 answer similar via IPv6 
addresses as well.  But do we re-open those discussions or encourage 
getting these out the door - after all this time?

wfms