Interesting new dns failures
ge at linuxbox.org
Tue May 22 20:52:32 UTC 2007
On 22 May 2007, Paul Vixie wrote:
> apropos of this...
> > >>As to NS fastflux, I think you are right. But it may also be an issue of
> > >>policy. Is there a reason today to allow any domain to change NSs
> > >>constantly?
> ...i just now saw the following on comp.protocols.dns.bind ("[email protected]"):
> | From: "Wiley Sanders" <bind at wsanders.net>
> | Newsgroups: comp.protocols.dns.bind
> | Subject: Hooray, glue updates are instantaneous!
> | Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 12:08:13 -0700
> | X-Original-Message-ID: <e0e823c0705221208p68d5984crfc1fbe02f0c86f00 at mail.gmail.com>
> | X-Google-Sender-Auth: fbac9c128e6c36c7
> | Well, maybe I've been out of the loop for a while but I just changed the IP
> | address of one of our authoritative name servers on Network Solutions' web
> | site and it propagated to all the gtld servers within 5 minutes.
> | I don't know how this got "fixed" but for all readers out there who may
> | contributed to making this magic happen, my hat is off to you, and I will
> | quaff a brew (or more) in your honor as I consider this a significant
> | contribution to the march of civilization.
> | -W Sanders
> | http://wsanders.net
> in general, we ought to be willing to implement almost anything if free beer
> is going to be offered by non-criminal beneficiaries.
If it's once in a long while like with this guy... may not be worth it. :P
If it's every 10 minutes like fast fluxers... I want in on that action.
> Paul Vixie
More information about the NANOG