8.4.4 reverse zone problems

[David Price]

> Ok, though this really asserts authority for the whole /16.  This will
> be a Bad Thing when you try to resolve addresses that are in
> 10.20.0.0/16 but not in 10.20.192.0/20.
> 
I try to avoid Bad Things if possible. What is the correct way to handle 
this type (/20) of delegation?

> What do you get from dig?  Timeout?  NXDOMAIN?  Somehting else?  Any
> errors when you load the zone?

When I use dig I get nothing back, there is no answer section and no 
authority section, just a query section and the summary.

> Concepts like "class A/B/C/D" and CIDR notation are routing elements,
> and the things in DNS that look similar to them are really just naming
> conventions.  

If this is true why is an entire RFC (2317) devoted to define how to 
delegate smaller-than-C-block sized address spaces? You even used CIDR 
notation in describing a problem above. I know CIDR numbers and the 
address classes are not directly applicable to DNS but they are 
inextricably part of IPv4.

  There's no reason that the zone
> "192.20.10.in-addr.arpa" couldn't have 500 records in it, for example,
> or 1000.
> 
Does that mean that a "192.20.10.in-addr.arpa" zone would be able to 
include pointer records for 200.20.10.in-addr.arpa and 
198.20.10.in-addr.arpa and BIND would respond authoritatively to queries 
against both of them?