On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 10:32:28AM -0800, Doug Otis wrote: >> Note that there has been work in DNSOP suggesting that rejecting on >> the failure of reverse DNS lookup is not always a good idea. > > Agreed. Just to be clear: I am not sure I agree with those who think reverse DNS should not be maintained, but there were strong currents in the WG that led to the text of that I-D as it stands. It isn't clear to me where the I-D stands in its progression (if there is to be any) from the WG, so I have no idea what the Chairs will say was consensus. But there was a WGLC in which at least some people suggested the text of draft-ietf-dnsop-reverse-mapping-considerations-06.txt still contained too much endorsement of the reverse tree. My personal interpretation of those remarks is that there will always be a hard core of operators who regard the reverse tree as an insupportable burden (without consideration for the v4/v6 differences). A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@xxxxxxxxxxxx Shinkuro, Inc. _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf