Why is RFC1918 space in public DNS evil?
jim at reptiles.org
Mon Sep 18 08:33:06 UTC 2006
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 03:18:07AM -0500, Gadi Evron wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Sep 2006, Petri Helenius wrote:
> > Matthew Palmer wrote:
> > > 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
> > >
> > >
> > 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.
> Putting all other issues aside, I believe you are right. Still, if VPN is
> the problem than it is solvable. These machines can be configured with a
> DNS server that knows where to go.
if the hosts inside the VPN can only be accessed by hostnames served up inside
the VPN, then it is more likely the users can be confident that their data
is actually traversing the VPN.
it works, or it don't.
[ Jim Mercer jim at reptiles.org +971 50 436-3874 ]
[ I want to live forever, or die trying. ]
More information about the NANOG