I'm seeing a lot of good things in the works in the reforming of amprNET/net44 including how ip address assignments and allocations are to be handled and managed, routing info exchanged dynamically via rip and other protocols, and the moving away from a single central point which all traffic has to essentially tunnel to as address space can now once allocated be tied to the appropriate AS and routed via BGP. all great things being done. there are a few things though I have not heard happening that I'll ask if they have been considered and what others thoughts may be. This for the most part deals with a gateway operator being able to manage the DNS zones pertaining to the operation of their gateway and it's users.
for the sake of discussion lets say we have a gateway operator with a /24 block assigned to their gateway and let's say that block is 44.128.128.0/24and lets say their call was gw4opr:
I would propose that along with the allocation of that block that gateway operator have the option to host and manage the 128.128.44.in-addr.arpa zone on their DNS servers.
I would also propose that those who would choose to could host and manage their own DNS zones, in this instance *.gw4opr.ampr.org.
It seems to just make sense that reverse dns would be managed by the ones responsible for and closest to the address space assigned and that one ought to be able to manage their own DNS zone without having to go through their address coordinator for every last dns update as long as they are willing to accept delegation of responsibility for their zone.
what are the thoughts on this from others on this list? Personally I think delegation of zones is a great idea, but perhaps I missed something. it would seem to further lighten the load on local coordinators. That said, why should we or why should we not plan for, allow, and even encourage, delegation and self management of DNS zones directly by those closest connected to and most responsible for them?
AF6EP
I wonder if the address coordinators could simply add an NS entry for those users who have this need and the 44-net DNS could transfer the zone info or just point to the DNS server for that zone. An ns.gw4opr.ampr.org could answer for that domain. This would allow those who have sub domains to run their own DNS. This would limit the potential for malicious or malformed entries into the 44-net DNS.
Regards, Geoff Joy KE6QH
On Feb 5, 2013, at 3:25, Eric Fort eric.fort@gmail.com wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ I'm seeing a lot of good things in the works in the reforming of amprNET/net44 including how ip address assignments and allocations are to be handled and managed, routing info exchanged dynamically via rip and other protocols, and the moving away from a single central point which all traffic has to essentially tunnel to as address space can now once allocated be tied to the appropriate AS and routed via BGP. all great things being done. there are a few things though I have not heard happening that I'll ask if they have been considered and what others thoughts may be. This for the most part deals with a gateway operator being able to manage the DNS zones pertaining to the operation of their gateway and it's users.
for the sake of discussion lets say we have a gateway operator with a /24 block assigned to their gateway and let's say that block is 44.128.128.0/24 and lets say their call was gw4opr:
I would propose that along with the allocation of that block that gateway operator have the option to host and manage the 128.128.44.in-addr.arpa zone on their DNS servers.
I would also propose that those who would choose to could host and manage their own DNS zones, in this instance *.gw4opr.ampr.org.
It seems to just make sense that reverse dns would be managed by the ones responsible for and closest to the address space assigned and that one ought to be able to manage their own DNS zone without having to go through their address coordinator for every last dns update as long as they are willing to accept delegation of responsibility for their zone.
what are the thoughts on this from others on this list? Personally I think delegation of zones is a great idea, but perhaps I missed something. it would seem to further lighten the load on local coordinators. That said, why should we or why should we not plan for, allow, and even encourage, delegation and self management of DNS zones directly by those closest connected to and most responsible for them?
AF6EP
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net http://www.ampr.org/donate.html
Sounds like a logical suggestion to me. I would be happy to post example bind configs and documentation on how to make this all happen.
73,
C.J. KF7BMP
On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 03:25 -0800, Eric Fort wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ I'm seeing a lot of good things in the works in the reforming of amprNET/net44 including how ip address assignments and allocations are to be handled and managed, routing info exchanged dynamically via rip and other protocols, and the moving away from a single central point which all traffic has to essentially tunnel to as address space can now once allocated be tied to the appropriate AS and routed via BGP. all great things being done. there are a few things though I have not heard happening that I'll ask if they have been considered and what others thoughts may be. This for the most part deals with a gateway operator being able to manage the DNS zones pertaining to the operation of their gateway and it's users.
for the sake of discussion lets say we have a gateway operator with a /24 block assigned to their gateway and let's say that block is 44.128.128.0/24 and lets say their call was gw4opr:
I would propose that along with the allocation of that block that gateway operator have the option to host and manage the 128.128.44.in-addr.arpa zone on their DNS servers.
I would also propose that those who would choose to could host and manage their own DNS zones, in this instance *.gw4opr.ampr.org.
It seems to just make sense that reverse dns would be managed by the ones responsible for and closest to the address space assigned and that one ought to be able to manage their own DNS zone without having to go through their address coordinator for every last dns update as long as they are willing to accept delegation of responsibility for their zone.
what are the thoughts on this from others on this list? Personally I think delegation of zones is a great idea, but perhaps I missed something. it would seem to further lighten the load on local coordinators. That said, why should we or why should we not plan for, allow, and even encourage, delegation and self management of DNS zones directly by those closest connected to and most responsible for them?
AF6EP
_________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net http://www.ampr.org/donate.html
-
C.J. Adams-Collier KF7BMP -
Eric Fort -
Geoff Joy