Subject: Are we done yet?

From: Bernard Aboba <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 09:44:57 -0700 (PDT)

This is just to confirm that we have consensus on the following text:

"Mapping from IPv4 addresses to host names is conventionally done
by issuing DNS queries for names of the form,
"x.x.x.x.in-addr.arpa." When used for link-local addresses, which
have significance only on the local link, it is inappropriate to
send such DNS queries beyond the local link.
DNS clients MUST NOT send DNS queries for any name that
falls within the "254.169.in-addr.arpa." domain.

DNS recursive name servers receiving queries from non-compliant clients
for names within the "254.169.in-addr.arpa." domain MUST by default return
RCODE 3, authoritatively asserting that no such name exists in
the Domain Name System."

I would propose that this text be added to Section 1.4, as part of the
following clause:

Change:

"   To preclude use of IPv4 Link-Local addresses in off-link
   communication, the following cautionary measures are advised:

   a. IPv4 Link-Local addresses MUST NOT be configured in the DNS."

To:

"  To preclude use of IPv4 Link-Local addresses in off-link
   communication, the following cautionary measures are advised:

   a. IPv4 Link-Local addresses MUST NOT be configured in the DNS.
      Mapping from IPv4 addresses to host names is conventionally done
      by issuing DNS queries for names of the form,
      "x.x.x.x.in-addr.arpa." When used for link-local addresses, which
      have significance only on the local link, it is inappropriate to
      send such DNS queries beyond the local link.
      DNS clients MUST NOT send DNS queries for any name that
      falls within the "254.169.in-addr.arpa." domain.

      DNS recursive name servers receiving queries from non-compliant
      clients for names within the "254.169.in-addr.arpa." domain MUST by
      default return RCODE 3, authoritatively asserting that no such name
      exists in the Domain Name System.
"

---

From: Daniel Senie <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 01:20:02 -0400

>This is just to confirm that we have consensus on the following text:

This says it correctly by my reading.