nanog mailing list archives
Re: Why is RFC1918 space in public DNS evil?
From: Petri Helenius <pete () he iki fi>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 11:10:02 +0300
Matthew Palmer wrote:
In many scenarios the VPN'd hosts will ask for the names from the public DNS anyway, so I feel your client is right and it would be better for you to go with their wishes.I've been directed to put all of the internal hosts and such into the public DNS zone for a client. My typical policy is to have a subdomain of the zone served internally, and leave only the publically-reachable hosts in the public zone. But this client, having a large number of hosts on RFC1918 space and a VPN for external people to get to it, is pushing against this
Pete
Current thread:
- Why is RFC1918 space in public DNS evil? Matthew Palmer (Sep 18)
- Re: Why is RFC1918 space in public DNS evil? Petri Helenius (Sep 18)
- Re: Why is RFC1918 space in public DNS evil? Gadi Evron (Sep 18)
- Re: Why is RFC1918 space in public DNS evil? Jim Mercer (Sep 18)
- Re: Why is RFC1918 space in public DNS evil? Daniel Senie (Sep 18)
- Re: Why is RFC1918 space in public DNS evil? Jim Mercer (Sep 18)
- Re: Why is RFC1918 space in public DNS evil? Gadi Evron (Sep 18)
- Re: Why is RFC1918 space in public DNS evil? Petri Helenius (Sep 18)
- Re: Why is RFC1918 space in public DNS evil? Michael Nicks (Sep 18)
- Re: Why is RFC1918 space in public DNS evil? Fred Baker (Sep 18)
- Re: Why is RFC1918 space in public DNS evil? Gadi Evron (Sep 18)
