Forward zone not working
megabrutal at gmail.com
Sat May 21 01:10:31 UTC 2016
2016-05-20 23:09 GMT+02:00 Woodworth, John R <John.Woodworth at centurylink.com>:
> The below referenced I-D for "BULK" records:
> * Provides "generics" which are automatically generated based on a set of rules.
> * The records have similar features as wildcards where they may be superimposed
> an appear only where more specific records do not already exist.
> * There are provisions for DNSSEC support of BULK generated records.
> * Can be done at any place in the DNS tree and overridden throughout the tree.
> * Can be easily AXFRed between servers.
> * Have immeasurably lower memory footprint compared with $GENERATEs (esp. IPv6).
I wanted to comment earlier that I really like the idea of BULK
records, and the invention of it seems logical. I think it fits well
into the evolution of the DNS protocol, it seems to be an answer to a
need not seen before. I hope it will be supported by BIND in the
future. It would be really insane to generate & store PTR records the
traditional way when we talk about typical sizes of IPv6 ranges.
As for the usefulness of PTR records for dynamic pools, I think
proper, forward-confirmed PTR records tell valuable information of the
user of the network. While normally this information is available in
WHOIS, it is not so easy and straightforward to retrieve, and it is
not always accurate. More often than not, WHOIS records only lead back
to the ISP when actually you want to know the user of the network. In
case of small businesses and home users, WHOIS does not reflect the
actual user of the IP range, while a reverse PTR could give a
More information about the bind-users