[dns-wg] Policy for Reverse DNS for End-User PA Addresses?

>>>>> "Brad" == Brad Knowles <brad.knowles at skynet.be> writes:

    >> Brad, please re-read what I said. I spoke about ISPs, not DSL
    >> providers.

    Brad> 	At least in some countries, the DSL provider owns the
    Brad> reverse DNS, not the ISP.

To repeat myself: please re-read what I said.

If bit-shifter A won't do reverse DNS to a customer's liking, the
customer can go to bit-shifter B who does. How A and B shift bits
is irrelevant: DSL, avian carriers, cable modems, whatever. It all
comes down to a trade-off between cost, QoS, bandwidth and reverse
DNS. If reverse DNS is the over-riding concern for someone, they can
always find an ISP who will do this. Though it may be from an ISP that
doesn't do DSL.

    >> If working reverse DNS is a very important consideration for
    >> some customer, they can always find an ISP who can accommodate
    >> that.

    Brad> 	Not all ISPs provide their own access.  In Belgium, I
    Brad> believe that Belgacom is the only DSL access provider that
    Brad> is allowed by law.  Everyone else has to resell DSL access
    Brad> from Belgacom, and Belgacom owns the reverse DNS.

So what? If they won't do reverse DNS to your liking, try a cable
company. Or get Level3 (say) to run fibre into your basement. Or do
dialup over your GSM. There's always a solution. But it might not be
as cheap or convenient as DSL from the incumbent. That's why I said
people can always vote with their wallets.

In the case of a monopoly provider, a "Correct Reverse DNS Is A Very
Good Thing" document from the WG might be helpful if their policies
are not addressing their customer's needs and those customers have
nowhere else to go.