On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 08:49:22AM +0300, Pekka Savola wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Jul 2002, Brad Knowles wrote:
> > At 6:35 AM +0900 2002/07/15, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
> > 
> > >   the co-existence of ip6.int and ip6.arpa tree will require us to:
> > >           query ip6.arpa;
> > >           if (no record)
> > >                   query ip6.int;
> > >   for backward compatibility.  was it taken into account, or did you
> > >   test just "ip6.arpa" lookups?
> > 
> >     I checked the source code for BIND 9.2.1, and IIRC it checks 
> > ip6.int first and then ip6.arpa second.  This allows us to stand up 
> > ip6.arpa whenever, and then once that is set, we can tear down 
> > ip6.int.
> 
> FWIW, e.g. Linux glibc resolver only checks ip6.arpa now, so you'd better 
> start standing up..

2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa:  NXDOMAIN
e.f.f.3.ip6.arpa:  NXDOMAIN

That's probably 70-80% of all IP6 deployments reachable via the
public ipv6 internet (granted, especially most 2002:: folks don't
have reverse DNS set up yet, but plenty do...).  It would be
reasonable for glibc to at least make fallback to ip6.int an option...

-- 
David Terrell             | "Any sufficiently advanced technology 
Prime Minister, Nebcorp   | is indistinguishable from a rigged demo."
[EMAIL PROTECTED]              |  - Brian Swetland
http://wwn.nebcorp.com/

Reply via email to