I'm fine with the -04 version.
Thanks
Brian
On 2007-10-29 10:14, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
or AD before posting a new version of the draft.
Document: draft-ietf-v6ops-scanning-implications-03.txt
Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
Review Date: 2007-10-29
IETF LC End Date: none
IESG Telechat date: 2007-11-01
Summary: Ready, one query
Comments:
Substantive:
Section 3.2
... It is also worth noting that
the reverse DNS tree may also expose address information. In such
cases, populating the reverse DNS tree for the entire subnet, even if
not all addresses are actually used, may reduce that exposure.
Doesn't this suggest that it's OK to publish 2^64 bogus PTR records
for every subnet?
By the way:
I've tracked this draft in the WG. As the writeup says "The working
group process was uneventful." I recall relatively little discussion
or contention.
There was one short comment thread by Jonne Soinenen and myself
that didn't get implemented, but it doesn't seem to justify
action at this stage - see
http://ops.ietf.org/lists/v6ops/v6ops.2007/msg00325.html
http://ops.ietf.org/lists/v6ops/v6ops.2007/msg00326.html
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
