On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 6:33 PM, Dean Gibson AE7Q ampr@ae7q.com wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ An open question on ampr.org hostnames (see my response below):
On 2014-04-08 15:32, Brian Kantor wrote:
Dean, I feel it would be a bad idea to delegate the forward lookup to your nameserver without also delegating the reverse lookup, which would be difficult and we do not do. You can continue to have as many names in the ampr.org dns like ns1.ae7q as you like by having John set them up for you, which will automatically set up the appropriate PTR record as well. I'd much rather you did it this way.
Best wishes. - Brian
(Brian)
Exactly why is it, " a bad idea to delegate the forward lookup to your nameserver without also delegating the reverse lookup, which would be difficult and we do not do."? For that matter when address space is delegated in the portal why not have the portal set reverse dns for that address space as wel or even better, establish a NS record that delegates reverse DNS as well? BCP20 Tells us how. Maybe require that those who request reverse DNS also run a swip server for their allocated space as well.
It does appear that DNS delegation would place less strain on coordinators and others responsible for keeping ampr.org/net44 dns running. Why not allow individuals who request it run their own? I'd propose we run a trial and let that prove the pluses and minuses of DNS delegation and not delegation. If it's such a bad idea, then why not demonstrate why to those who disagree by allowing a small trial. If it's the horendous idea you claim it to be then all of us who disagree and think it's a great idea ought end up looking like fools with egg on our face and you get to go see... OTOH, if it works out It could be of great benifet to the AMPRNET community and a relief for the coordinators.
Eric AF6EP