[dns-wg] Replacing reverse zone delegations by DNAMEs

On Dec 2 2010, Tony Finch wrote:

>On Thu, 2 Dec 2010, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Tony Finch:
>> > On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Niall O'Reilly wrote:
>> >>
>> >> 	Me too. I think that the approach which Chris is suggesting
>> >> 	sits more in LIR territory than with the RIRs.
>> >
>> > What about legacy allocations where the DNAME needs to be placed in a
>> > reverse zone maintained by RIPE?
>>
>> I don't think such a case actually exists.  Could you be more
>> specific?
>
>Ah, now I look they seem to be ARIN's zones. (Our allocations include
>128.232, 129.169, and 131.111.)

It's actually rather less likely that we would want to use the scheme
for those large reverse zones. We also have 192.152.213/24 and 192.84.5/24
(which are also ERX and ARIN-hosted) for which it would be useful - but
that's only two zones, not really worth worrying about.

Locally, I have my eye on the several 193.60.x/24 zones we have delegated
from JANET. (193.60/16 is delegated to JANET by RIPE.) So why didn't
I start off by raising this in a JANET context rather than a RIPE one?
Let's just say that I thought here a better place to get useful technical
input...

-- 
Chris Thompson               University of Cambridge Computing Service,
Email: cet1 at ucs.cam.ac.uk    New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QH,
Phone: +44 1223 334715       United Kingdom.