Re: IPv6 reverse lookup - lame delegation?

[Paul Vixie <vixie () vix com>]

edlewis () arin net (Edward Lewis) writes:
> ...
> DNAME was kind of the "third record in."  The change in it's "status" 
> pertained to the role it played in supporting bit sting labels - 
> which is why the "reverse tree" is mentioned in the deprecation. 
> Looking at the document now, the document ought to have read "the use 
> of DNAME RRs in the support of bit string labels is deprecated" - 
> based on my memory.

I wasn't there, but that's what the meeting notes seem to say, and that's
what the people who were there all seem to agree on.  Not that it matters;
the type is defined and at least one authority server implementation will
synthesize protocol-compliant CNAME RRs in the presence of DNAMEs, and so
the approach documented at www.isc.org/pubs/tn/ will universally work OK.
-- 
Paul Vixie