On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 01:54:44PM +0200, Shane Kerr <[email protected]> wrote a message of 66 lines which said:
> Having said all of that, I don't see any strong requirement that > this document provide motivation for reverse DNS solutions for > IPv6. People ask about the problem, and want solutions, and it would > be good to have a document to point them to with some help. OK, but then the draft should be edited to remove things like "RFC 1912 says you should have a PTR". Let's make it just a catalog of possible solutions "if you want to allow your customers to have PTRs", with assessments of their price, ease of use, scalability, etc. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
