[dns-wg] use of "rev-srv" attribute in "inetnum" (and "inet6num") objects
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] use of "rev-srv" attribute in "inetnum" (and "inet6num") objects
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] use of "rev-srv" attribute in "inetnum" (and "inet6num") objects
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Peter Koch
pk at DENIC.DE
Mon Apr 2 17:00:08 CEST 2007
On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 03:37:56PM +0100, Leo Vegoda wrote: > Do you know what percentage of rev-srv records are fully or partially > accurate? I had hoped to be able to avoid this :-) Seriously, that depends on what you consider accurate - or even 'partially accurate'. Is it reality or what the domain: objects say? And is reality what the delegation says or what the authoritative NS RRSet suggests? Just one example: 1000 out of ~ 6000 name servers pointed at by rev-srv attributes didn't even resolve. Whether that's good or bad depends on what the quality of the domain: objects' nserver: attributes looks like. For a match between rev-srv: and nserver: I've tried to get hold of those address ranges greater or equal than /24, postulating /24 or /16 equivalent in-addr.arpa domains where appropriate. The calculation is very rough since /24s may be covered by /16s and sometimes there are domain: objects for both the /16 and (some of) the lower /24s as well (which is confusing in and of itself). With all caveats, out of 38000 candidate domain: objects, only about 50% were actually present. Of those, approximately 2/3 had the same idea of the NS RRSet as the inetnum: object. For those disagreeing, there might be overlaps ("partially accurate") or disjoint sets. -Peter
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] use of "rev-srv" attribute in "inetnum" (and "inet6num") objects
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] use of "rev-srv" attribute in "inetnum" (and "inet6num") objects
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]