Anyone from AT&T DNS?

Jay Farrell jayfar at
Thu Oct 5 08:12:30 CST 2017

Yep, the notation with the slash used to be ATT's standard method. At my
job (where we had some customers with ATT MIS T1 circuits) we transitioned
to a web front end for our DNS that didn't allow for the slash, so we had
to nudge ATT to allow us to use a dash notation instead for delegations.

As far as to what can appear in a DNS entry, you'd be amazed. I encountered
a PTR record containing a full URL, http:// and everything; it didn't
actually work of course, but bind allowed it to exist. When I tracked down
the cow-orker who had entered it, he said he knew it wasn't valid, but he
did it that way when the customer insisted it had to be thus. :-D

On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 11:33 PM, Matt Peterman <mpeterman at> wrote:

> I can now confirm that Christopher is right about everything (not that I
> had any doubts! Just wanted to confirm all is working!!)
> ATT is now following the RFC (apparently has changed since November 2016
> and June 2017 allocations and DNS changes) and that Route53 WebUI displays
> things strangely, however technically works fine on the backend. rDNS is
> now working properly. Thank you Christopher very much! I learned a lot in
> the last hour I can sure say that!
> Matt
> > On Oct 4, 2017, at 11:20 PM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists at>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 11:18 PM, Matt Peterman <mpeterman at
> <mailto:mpeterman at>> wrote:
> > Got it! You’re the winner here. I just setup both of my zones the name
> way and obviously AT&T changed the way they did RDNS entries from when I
> got a /25 last November and this second /25 in June. Oh well!
> >
> > Now I am running into the challenge of Route53 does seem to support
> creating an authoritative zone for "128/” It
> changes it to "128\” every time… *sigh* If
> it isn't one thing its something else.
> >
> >
> > I've not messed with route53 but fortunately you are treading on well
> trodden ground:
> > <
> >
> > have a happy evening! (and I hope that the above works.. again I haven't
> and can't actually try it)

More information about the NANOG mailing list