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/dns-wg@ripe.net/
[dns-wg] DOMAIN attributes review
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] DOMAIN attributes review
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Peter Koch
pk at DENIC.DE
Tue Jul 19 08:09:58 CEST 2011
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 03:47:56PM +0200, Denis Walker wrote: > With the removal of any hierarchy in reverse delegations and the removal > of forward domain data there is no longer any use case for the > "mnt-lower:" attribute. > > Other attributes that are considered to be used only for forward domains > are: > - "refer:" > - "sub-dom:" > - "dom-net:" thanks for getting the ball rolling, Denis. > Number of each attribute used in reverse delegations or ENUMs and the > number of unique maintainers who manage these objects. > > "refer:" = 6 unique maintainers = 1 all these objects share the same target that i currently cannot connect to (port 43 or otherwise). Also I do not believe this makes much sense for the reverse space. It could be intersting for ENUM, though, but then for similar reasons as in the forward case (ACL maintenance and the likes) it is probably practically useless. (maybe repost the first message to the ENUM list ...) > "sub-dom:" = 271 unique maintainers = 23 > "dom-net:" = 2219 unique maintainers = 140 dom-net seems to list the exact address space that corresponds to the IN-ADDR.ARPA subdomain in question, so that appears rather redundant. sub-dom is almost always used in a way inconsistent with the syntax description (which requires non-FQDNs) and most uses seem to be enumerations of sibling domains rather than subdomains. For ENUM, the choice of available subdomains is even more limited, so i doubt it's useful there, either. > "mnt-lower:" = 46485 unique maintainers = 4208 With the lack of ability to register subdomains in the reverse tree this might be obsolete. The relative popularity might suggest kind of an awareness campaign, though. For ENUM, I'm not sure whether this is still necesary as a protective measure. In any case, centrally changing the Tier1 objects will take some extra effort. -Peter (no hats)
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] DOMAIN attributes review
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]