Alternative to RFC2317 -- Classless Delegation

[Barry Margolin]

In article <eldhj1$2fs7$1 at sf1.isc.org>,
 "Dan Mahoney, System Admin" <danm at prime.gushi.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 9 Dec 2006, Mark Andrews wrote:
> >> What is wrong with the NS-only scheme of doing things?  Clearly RFC2317 is
> >> as complex as it is for a reason, but I'm curious as to why.
> >
> > 	Because it is more work overall especially for the child.
> 
> Can you clarify that?  From my POV it's...
> 
> Define a standard in-addr.arpa. zone.
> 
> or
> 
> Define whatever zone the whim of the parent defines (with the knowledge 
> that different parents will have totally different syntaxes), with 
> possibly illegal characters by your resolver software.

With the NS-only scheme of things, you have to define a separate zone on 
the child for each address that's delegated.  Each of these will need to 
have SOA and NS records, in addition to the PTR record.

With RFC 2317, you define a single zone for all the records.  It's even 
possible to put them in some other zone that's already defined (you 
could put them in your forward zone if you want).  Once you create this 
zone, you populate it just like you would for a classful delegation.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar at alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***