[dns-wg] sub-/24 "delegation" [2014-01 New Policy Proposal (Abandoning the Minimum Allocation Size for IPv4)]

On Mar 27, 2014, at 12:39 PM, Doug Barton <dougb at dougbarton.us>
 wrote:

> On 03/27/2014 02:58 AM, Janos Zsako wrote:
>> Dear all,
>> 
>>> people on this list might be interested in one aspect of the
>>> proposed policy <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2014-01>,
>>> <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/2014-March/008638.html>,
>>> 
>>> when it comes to (sub-)allocations smaller than /24.
>>> Note that BCP10/RFC 2317 is not necessarily the or the only solution
>>> to the problem.
>> 
>> _Technically_ speaking, in my opinion BCP20/RFC2317 is an
>> acceptable solution. It is a trade off: it increases the number of
>> DNS queries,
> 
> It doesn't have to increase the number of DNS queries if the parent slaves the child's zone(s). The parent will have the answer for the first query that arrives from a given resolver, and the child will receive subsequent queries directly. Also see
> https://dougbarton.us/DNS/2317.html for more thoughts. :)

OOC, was any thought given to this approach?
	http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gersch-dnsop-revdns-cidr-01

IIRC, there is a treatise in that draft that relates its proposal to RFC 2317.

Eric