mailing list archives
Re: DNS contamination
From: Marc Slemko <marcs () znep com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:50:17 -0700 (MST)
And, of possibly more importance to more people, is when people start
claiming bogus authority for the reverse of a /8. For example, last week
someone was claiming authority for 205.in-addr.arpa and 204.in-addr.arpa
instead of for their appropriate /24s. A good quarter of the servers I
checked had at least one of these bogus records, rendering reverse lookups
for 204 and/or 205 non-functional and messing up anything that relys on
reverse DNS working.
I think this is a big deal when it happens, especially for the people
using the address space it affects. Am I overreacting?
If the server admin is unreachable, I think the provider should attempt
contact and, if necessary, perhaps even filter the server. Most providers
seem to have a "oh, that's bad. We'll get to it in a day or two"
attitude. I tend to consider it a serious operational problem that needs
to be fixed ASAP.
On Thu, 23 Jan 1997, Dean Gaudet wrote:
Is something like a web page listing the "bogusns"s of the day in order?
We could include the broken servers that claim to be root servers for
non-existant TLDs like .space.
On Thu, 23 Jan 1997, Dima Volodin wrote:
To all DNS admins:
please check that you don't have 22.214.171.124 and 126.96.36.199 mentioned
anywhere in your files. If you do, remove such records and change your
DNS server software to something more reasonable.
fed up his ears with named's chronic inability to filter out bogus
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Re: DNS contamination Dean Gaudet (Jan 23)
Re: DNS contamination Neil J. McRae (Jan 24)