IPv6 and DNS for the residential service provider

[Jeroen Massar]

On 2012-09-25 14:48, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> Jeroen Massar <jeroen at unfix.org> writes:
>> On 2012-09-25 11:44, Ole Trøan wrote:
>>
>>> there is a recurring question being asked though... and that is "do
>>> we really need reverse DNS for IPv6?"
>>
>> Yes, because IPv6 addresses look really ugly in 'who' output...
> 
> Maybe.  But a little less ugly than any autogenerated name, IMHO.

One can generate them from a dictionary as we used to have for
Takeover.nl back in the day, but of course that means that at one point
you run out of words when somebody attacks your scanner.

Indeed if the reverse is based on the address it will be ugly too,
though it would have a little value as the domain they are put under
would indicate the ISP/organization (which can be found with whois
likely too though).

>> Reverse is required to be able to nicely map an IP to to a hostname so
>> that people going through logs can see 'ah that is that host' instead of
>> having to memorize them, that is why we have DNS in the first place.
> 
> How are you going to map the IP to a hostname so that you can insert
> this into the DNS?  And if you can already do that, why do you need DNS?

This mapping happens with the standard called Reverse DNS aka ip6.arpa?
Simple NS server registration at the parent and a delegation...

Nothing new is needed to be invented there for static delegations.

>> And that even goes for a home environment, especially because more and
>> more people will work from home and connect to their workplaces.
> 
> I still don't see how you are going to collect the host names people use
> in their homes.

I am not going to collect. I stated that reverse DNS even in home
environments, or otherwise said at an end-user, is also something that
is a good thing as they will be connecting to corporate networks.

When then properly configured these networks also have proper reverse.

Greets,
 Jeroen