Re: 193.in-addr.arpa block delegation procedures (draft)

[Marten Terpstra <]

 bonito@localhost (Antonio_Blasco Bonito) writes:
 * > Yes and no inconsistent. I was just brainstorming a bit here, and since it
 * > would be nice for some people to have the delegated blocks in the database
 *  I
 * > was looking for a way to include them in the database. I do NOT want to
 * > suggest here that all the rev-srv fields should be changed by sending in
 * > in-addr,arpa domains for individual nets, just for the blocks. This might 
 * be
 * > a bit confusing. I am just looking for possibilities that are both easy an
 * d
 * > clear ...
 * > 
 * > -Marten
 * 
 * OK, but at least we have to decide about 193.something networks.
 * Either we use rev-srv network tags or we use nserver domain tags.
 * Using both is certainly tedious and confusing.

Blasco,

I agree and I do not agree here (maybe I should make up my mind ;-)
I agree that using both can be confusing, but they are used for different
purposes. I would not like to see individual nets as in-addr.arpa domains in
the database, because that information is superfluous in my view. There are
no delegated blocks in the database yet, so I kind of like the idea of
putting them (and only them) as in-addr.arpa domains in the db. The only ones
that have to deal with these domains are registries, who I hope are not too
easily confused. I could be wrong here. Anyone else with bright ideas ?

Another thing would be to create YADO (Yet Another Database Object) for
delegated blocks only, but I do not quite like that idea either.

-Marten