December 2004 - dns-wg - mailman.ripe.net

IPv6 access to K-root
by Andrei Robachevsky 28 Feb '05

28 Feb '05

Colleagues, K-root server has now IPv6 transport enabled. k.root-servers.net. AAAA 2001:7fd::1 A 193.0.14.129 This information is also available from www.root-servers.org webiste. Regards, Andrei Robachevsky RIPE NCC

10 17

Re: ORSN-SERVERS.NET
by Markus Grundmann/ORSN 25 Jan '05

25 Jan '05

>In total 76 instances of a root-server of which are 25 in the >EU, 26 in the US, and 50 outside EU/US. >And this network is growing and growing I'm very happy about this posting ;-) 76 copies of an single database source managed by an organization outside from europe and controlled by the U.S. DOC. Great! When it comes the master corrupt all AnyCast servers will use this information. Very great and very stable! ORSN is an DNS system with all the same information provided by ICANN. The difference: We have our own managed and independent database!!! In few days you will found an tool to compare the ORSN database with the ICANN root servers in realtime on our homepage. Some people wrote (not here): "ORSN is not transparently enough!" Sorry! But I must laughing about this words. We do provide all needed information for interested users. Peoples must read our homepage carefully before any can write this. Notice: The independent mode of ORSN was implemented to disable the automatic synchronization of the database. Regards, Markus Grundmann ORSN, Open Root Server Network Germany

10 13

Announcement: Policy Development Process in RIPE
by Rob Blokzijl 21 Dec '04

21 Dec '04

To the RIPE Community, later today I will publish a draft document that describes the policy making process in RIPE. It is draft, so your input is requested in order to come to a generally accepted final document. Logistics: - deadline for comments on the first draft: 1 Februari 2005 - discussion takes place on ripe-list(a)ripe.net - if you are not subscribed to ripe-list(a)ripe.net yet, go to http://www.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list#subscribers - for any questions, don't hesitate to contact chair(a)ripe.net As always, apologies for receiving multiple copies of this announcement. Best regards, Rob Blokzijl RIPE Chairman

2 1

RE: [dns-wg] Matching forward and reverse DNS for DSL pool addresses
by brian.wilkinson＠bt.com 01 Dec '04

01 Dec '04

ok - Thanks to all that replied. We already provide matching forward and reverse - I just wanted to verify that it was definitly required as I am currently reviewing our DNS management processes. Regards Brian -----Original Message----- From: Jim Reid [mailto:jim@rfc1035.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 12:48 PM To: Wilkinson,BJ,Brian,XJG11 R Cc: dns-wg(a)ripe.net Subject: Re: [dns-wg] Matching forward and reverse DNS for DSL pool addresses >>>>> "brian" == <brian.wilkinson(a)bt.com> writes: brian> Can anyone confirm whether DSL (and dial) providers are brian> required to provide matching forward and reverse DNS for brian> the address pools or is a wildcard in the reverse zones brian> sufficient? There's no requirement. Though your customers might appreciate it if reverse lookups worked for the IP addresses. Sometimes applications will make life difficult for hosts that don't have working reverse DNS. For instance a client that initiates an SMTP connection may be considered a spam source if there's no sensible answer to a reverse lookup of the client's address. And as Peter has said, wildcards are probably not a good idea for this sort of thing. It could also break when the application does a forwward lookup of the name returned by a reverse lookup. The BSD r- protocols -- which I hope nobody uses any more -- do this to decide if the client is who they claim to be and therefore determin if the client is trusted or not.

1 0

Re: [dns-wg] Matching forward and reverse DNS for DSL pool addresses
by Jim Reid 01 Dec '04

01 Dec '04

>>>>> "brian" == <brian.wilkinson(a)bt.com> writes: brian> Can anyone confirm whether DSL (and dial) providers are brian> required to provide matching forward and reverse DNS for brian> the address pools or is a wildcard in the reverse zones brian> sufficient? There's no requirement. Though your customers might appreciate it if reverse lookups worked for the IP addresses. Sometimes applications will make life difficult for hosts that don't have working reverse DNS. For instance a client that initiates an SMTP connection may be considered a spam source if there's no sensible answer to a reverse lookup of the client's address. And as Peter has said, wildcards are probably not a good idea for this sort of thing. It could also break when the application does a forwward lookup of the name returned by a reverse lookup. The BSD r- protocols -- which I hope nobody uses any more -- do this to decide if the client is who they claim to be and therefore determin if the client is trusted or not.

1 0

Matching forward and reverse DNS for DSL pool addresses
by brian.wilkinson＠bt.com 01 Dec '04

01 Dec '04

Can anyone confirm whether DSL (and dial) providers are required to provide matching forward and reverse DNS for the address pools or is a wildcard in the reverse zones sufficient? Regards Brian Wilkinson

3 2