North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: DNS contamination
- From: Marc Slemko
- Date: Thu Jan 23 19:51:05 1997
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.
> > Dima
> > fed up his ears with named's chronic inability to filter out bogus
> > additional records
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -