Reverse DNS RFCs and Recommendations

Andrew Sullivan asullivan at dyn.com
Wed Oct 30 16:55:37 UTC 2013


On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 04:24:42PM +0000, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> the only thing that's important is that forward and reverse DNS matches.

As I think I've said before on this list, when we tried to get
consensus on that claim in the DNSOP WG at the IETF, we couldn't.
Indeed, we couldn't even get consensus on the much more bland
statement, "Some people rely on the reverse, and you might want to
take that into consideration when running your services."  

Now, IETF non-consensus on the way the Internet works is hardly a
surprise, but I thought I'd point this out just in case people want to
be prepared for flames from people who feel strongly about the matter.

Note, also, that there's an important distinction to be made between
matching reverse and mere existence of some reverse.  An lot of sites
don't require matching any more, because of the way it can bloat PTR
RRsets if there are a lot of forward names at the same IP address.

Best,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
Dyn, Inc.
asullivan at dyn.com
v: +1 603 663 0448




More information about the NANOG mailing list