Michael Thomas wrote:
On 08/31/2015 04:42 AM, Ray Hunter (v6ops) wrote:
Juliusz (and others) have objected to
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options
because it appears to be tied to the ISP. Yet for reverse resolution,
the ISP is an essential party, because they have been delegated the
DNS zone for their entire allocated address space. And Homenet uses
delegated prefixes from within this overall allocation.
What that tells me, on the other hand, is that these are two separate
problems that
just need to get solved. And, in fact, the forward and reverse maps
may not same auth/authz
requirements for their respective CRUD operations.
Mike
I think you may be right, assuming we want to do DNS for Homenet properly.
i.e. we should be talking about updating multiple ISPs for reserve
resolution (per delegated IPv6 prefix), and potentially multiple ISPs or
independent DNS providers for forward resolution (per delegated name space).
And when we're talking about "updating" we also have at least two
alternatives:
1) maintaining the RRs in the ISPs' or 3rd party DNS providers' DNS
servers, or
2) ensuring proper delegation and glue records exist, pointing at
Homenet's own DNS servers (whether they are located on or off Homenet).
Automating zone delegation and glue record insertion with zeroconf seems
quite a hole in current standards.........
and that is also not covered in DNS-SD AFAICS.
--
regards,
RayH
<https://www.postbox-inc.com/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=siglink&utm_campaign=reach>
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
