Re: DNS contamination

[Marc Slemko <marcs () znep com>]

And, of possibly more importance to more people, is when people start
claiming bogus authority for the reverse of a /8.  For example, last week
someone was claiming authority for 205.in-addr.arpa and 204.in-addr.arpa
instead of for their appropriate /24s.  A good quarter of the servers I
checked had at least one of these bogus records, rendering reverse lookups
for 204 and/or 205 non-functional and messing up anything that relys on
reverse DNS working. 

I think this is a big deal when it happens, especially for the people
using the address space it affects.  Am I overreacting? 

If the server admin is unreachable, I think the provider should attempt
contact and, if necessary, perhaps even filter the server.  Most providers
seem to have a "oh, that's bad.  We'll get to it in a day or two"
attitude.  I tend to consider it a serious operational problem that needs
to be fixed ASAP.



On Thu, 23 Jan 1997, Dean Gaudet wrote:

> Is something like a web page listing the "bogusns"s of the day in order? 
> We could include the broken servers that claim to be root servers for
> non-existant TLDs like .space.
>
> Dean
>
> On Thu, 23 Jan 1997, Dima Volodin wrote:
>
> > To all DNS admins:
> >
> > please check that you don't have 199.0.55.3 and 144.228.8.227 mentioned
> > anywhere in your files. If you do, remove such records and change your
> > DNS server software to something more reasonable.
> >
> >
> > Dima
> > fed up his ears with named's chronic inability to filter out bogus
> > additional records

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -