This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[dns-wg] ripe policy about reverse dns?
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] Query on Resolver w.r.t DNSSEC
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Olaf M. Kolkman
olaf at ripe.net
Mon Nov 1 16:38:46 CET 2004
Peter Gervai <grin at grin.hu> wrote: > I tend to remember that RIPE had a strict policy about delegated address > space reverse DNS: adresses must have a valid reverse and delegated (sub) > blocks must be registered in RIPE db. I wanted to refer to the document > mentioning these requirements but I was not able to find them. Hello Peter, The reverse delegation policy is documented in: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/rev-del.html There is _no_ wording about the RIPE NCC requiring reverse delegation to be set up by the LIR or by the end users. I reckon that the language you tend to remember is from the RIPE 244 (obsoleted) section 5.0: "LIRs should provide reverse delegation corresponding to an assignment during the complete validity period of the assignment." I hope this answers your query. Kind regards, -- Olaf Kolkman RIPE NCC. PS. "Encouraging the use of DNS IN-ADDR Mapping" by D. Senie might be relevant. That draft is currently discussed in the IETF DNSOP working group, the most recent revision can be found at: http://www.senie.com/dan/draft-ietf-dnsop-inaddr-required.txt ---------------------------------| Olaf M. Kolkman ---------------------------------| RIPE NCC
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] Query on Resolver w.r.t DNSSEC
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]