[6bone] .int / .arpa

[Iljitsch van Beijnum]

On 21-feb-05, at 21:24, Pekka Savola wrote:

> Bind 9.3.0 removed support for bitstring queries, so if you:
>  - run BIND 9.3.0 as your caching server, and
>  - your hosts' resolver libraries send ip6.arpa records in bitstring  
> format, while ip6.int queries are sent in nibbles (e.g., RHL9, maybe  
> others)

My somewhat aging Red Hat Linux 9 system doesn't do this:

root at torreya root]# uname -a
Linux torreya 2.4.20-8 #1 Thu Mar 13 17:54:28 EST 2003 i686 i686 i386  
GNU/Linux

22:16:28.341283 torreya.muada.com.32773 > sequoia.muada.com.domain:  
[udp sum ok]  58539+ PTR?  
e.5.a.a.5.3.e.f.f.f.0.7.0.6.2.0.0.0.0.0.6.0.0.0.8.f.a.1.1.0.0.2.ip6.arpa 
. (90) (len 98, hlim 63)
22:16:28.341661 sequoia.muada.com.domain > torreya.muada.com.32773:  
[udp sum ok]  58539 NXDomain* 0/1/0 (148) (len 156, hlim 64)
22:16:28.356711 torreya.muada.com.32773 > sequoia.muada.com.domain:  
[udp sum ok]  58540+ PTR?  
e.5.a.a.5.3.e.f.f.f.0.7.0.6.2.0.0.0.0.0.6.0.0.0.8.f.a.1.1.0.0.2.ip6.int. 
  (89) (len 97, hlim 63)

[...]

22:16:47.970774 torreya.muada.com.32773 > sequoia.muada.com.domain:  
[udp sum ok]  58558+ PTR?  
d.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.8.f.4.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.arpa 
. (90) (len 98, hlim 63)
22:16:47.971687 sequoia.muada.com.domain > torreya.muada.com.32773:  
[udp sum ok]  58558 1/5/3  
d.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.8.f.4.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.arpa 
. PTR www.isc.org. (287) (len 295, hlim 64)

The first two lines are for an address that doesn't have any reverse  
mapping, and it asks for ip6.arpa and then ip6.int. For the last two  
lines ip6.arpa works so it doesn't do ip6.int. (Scott: Verio has both  
ip6.arpa and ip6.int. That's doing the right thing, because this works  
if your system asks for ip6.arpa but also if it asks for ip6.int. The  
real question is why in your case, it seems to ask for ip6.int.)

But bitlabels never enter the picture.

I installed this system somewhere in the second half of 2003. I can't  
imagine they changed it to look up bitlabels after this...

(But then, I never understood why people use Linux for network stuff in  
the first place, when *BSD does it so much better.)

> .. You'll experience about 30-40 seconds of delay when you try to log  
> on using SSH.  Bind 9.2.4 and earlier work fine.

??? As far as I can tell, there are no bitlabel delegations, so how  
would this work?

And why would there be a delay? BIND 9.3.0 doesn't support bitlabels so  
I assume it returns an error so there shouldn't be any delays.

>   Yes, this has been reported to Bind fellows, and closed as "working  
> as designed."

> Sigh..

I see your "sigh" and I raise you a "yuck". I'm sticking with BIND 9.2.