[Ietf-not43] extensibility

[Edward Lewis]

At 16:41 -0400 7/25/03, David Blacka wrote:
>Let me try to restate this:  you are saying that because address allocation
>information, unlike domain allocation information, does not need DNS to
>function, and so the reverse tree is broken, clumsy or nonexistent.  Thus,
>using the reverse tree to find CRISP servers is problematic.
>
>Did I get that right?

Dang close.  s/reverse tree is/reverse tree could be and in some cases is/

>Assuming I did, and it seems like a reasonable conclusion to me, do you
>have a better suggestion?  do you think that all address searches should
>start from the top (i.e., just don't do SRV lookups)?

I don't have a suggestion at this point, I'm still new to the problem 
and my belief/theory that there's a significant difference lurking 
here.  I wish I had a suggestion.

Perhaps yes to the latter question.  It's fairly clear to go to the 
source of the authority and ask "who did you give it to" and chase 
the chain of custody than reverse the path.  One reason - you can't 
rely on there being a reverse DNS for the space.  Another reason is 
with the way addresses can be reassigned and used, it's not easy to 
reverse the path.  E.g., I (as a registry) may allocate to you (as 
operator) 5 IP prefixes and 5 AS numbers, but I can't tell how you 
mix and match them.  (I'd need to look into the route tables to see.)


-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                            +1-703-227-9854
ARIN Research Engineer

...as graceful as a blindfolded bull in a china shop...