reverse DNS considered pointless was: [6bone] Fwd: BCP 80, RFC3681 on Delegation of E.F.F.3.IP6.ARPA

[Matthew Luckie]

>>i did a DNS walk of ip6.int about 9 months ago.
> 
> The trick here is that you should taka a look at ip6.arpa.
> ip6.int has been deprecated for over 2 years ago...
> Please check ip6.arpa and test RIR space, not 6bone space as
> can be seen yet again, ip6.arpa for 6bone will take quite some
> time and even more time to get deployed under the many slumbering
> and neglected pTLA's floating around.

yeah, I know about that.  I was going to do the same experiment on 
ip6.arpa.  In theory the DNS for ip6.int was smaller than for ip6.arpa, 
so it was useful to run my code on ip6.int first.  I was/am really 
worried about finding large numbers of autogenerated reverses, and 
wanted to get some indication as to what I was likely to hit on ip6.arpa.

>>of the ~31k addresses i got, 21k were automatically generated 
>>(2x 10k, 1x 1k).  i saw a fair amount of DNS spamming, but it did not 
>>feel like IRC lamers had taken over the DNS.  From memory there was 
>>some kind of free DNS service behind a fair amount of the spam.

<SNIP>

> Do you have some more detailed output of these results. Also did
> you mean you autogenerated 21k addresses or that you found 21k
> autogenerated reverses?

I found 21k autogenerated reverses.  I can have a look at the data and 
report on other stats if you would like to suggest things to report on. 
  I noticed a fair number of invalid addresses returned (as in addresses 
that are one byte too long or too short).  Perhaps I should look into 
that.  Answering your question, I don't have a more detailed output of 
the DNS quirks I saw.