On May 7, 2014, at 12:23 PM, P Vixie <p...@redbarn.org> wrote: > Centralized rdns is not necessary and it makes the internet brittle. Better > alternatives exist. The architecture of DNS assumes localized rdns. If we're > going to document client subnet then all that advice will have to go into it.
While I am sure many readers will sympathize with your point about centralized rdns, it's worth noting that it's equally true that relying on topology to determine the answer that the resolver gives to certain queries is also brittle. The "architectural assumption" you are claiming is not actually an architectural assumption in the DNS protocol, but rather an assumption commonly made by a particular (admittedly fairly important) set of publishers of DNS data, because it is convenient to do so. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
