classless delegation [Re: IP address fee??]
Brad Knowles
brad.knowles at skynet.be
Fri Sep 6 14:56:09 UTC 2002
At 4:40 PM +0200 2002/09/06, Peter van Dijk wrote:
> I am doing separate zone files. Each IP delegated to me is a separate
> zone. Now, again, what is wrong with that?
Technically, nothing -- at least, with the absolute latest
authoritative nameservers and the absolute latest recursive/caching
nameservers, and it doesn't seem to give much problems to modern
resolver libraries.
Procedurally, everything is wrong with it -- in part, because of
the profusion of mis-configured authoritative and recursive/caching
nameservers that exist on the Internet today (not to mention
resolving libraries), the fact that most vendors today still ship
vulnerable authoritative & recursive/caching nameservers with their
OSes (and *no one* ships an OS that uses modern resolver libraries),
and the fact that 99.999999% of the people on the 'net will take the
default garbage that the vendor ships to them simply because they
don't know any better.
>> o The reverse zone contains one or more A records
>> The reverse domain "192.122.109.193.in-addr.arpa." contains one
>> or more A records. A records should only be placed in
>> forward-mapping domains.
>
> What A-records is it talking about? I am not seeing any.
They are the ones associated with your NS records. At a
procedural level, PTR records are mutually exclusive with SOA & NS
records.
> Indeed, you found some things wrong with the /24 zone, but that was
> not the subject, and nothing you found wrong with the /24 is related
> to the /29.
See above.
--
Brad Knowles, <brad.knowles at skynet.be>
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania.
GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++)>: a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI++++$ P+>++ L+ !E W+++(--) N+ !w---
O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP>+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++)
tv+(+++) b+(++++) DI+(++++) D+(++) G+(++++) e++>++++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++)
More information about the NANOG
mailing list