[CentOS] [OT] DNS - asking for your opinion

[Maciej Żenczykowski]

IMHO the convention is stupid (and isn't really any convention - everyone 
does it differently, i've seen x.x.x.x.in-addr.arpa being CNAMEs to: 
x.128.x.x.x.in-addr.arpa, x.128/25.x.x.x.in-addr.arpa 
x.128-255.x.x.x.in-addr.arpa, x.128-25.x.x.x.in-addr.arpa or even 
x.x.x.x.revdns.company.com or x.revdns.company.com) and the only 
reason it's even there is because Bind is brain-dead.  There's no need to 
use anything besides normal x.x.x.x.in-addr.arpa (especially if you use 
djbdns or if you're willing to put a little more work into bind).

Cheers,
MaZe.

On Thu, 1 Sep 2005, Simone wrote:

> Hi list, I first apologise because this is really off topic, but I would 
> really appreciate your opinion on this.
>
> I have had a very hard time configuring a DNS server to answer reverse dns 
> queries, and I would like to have your opinion on my provider behaviour.
> We have 3 classless subnets and asked the provider to delegate reverse dns. 
> They configured their server and emailed me all was fine but i it didn't work 
> for one subnet, so I mailed back and they assure their side was all perfectly 
> configured.
> I finally find out (spending lot of time and thanks to www.dnsstuff.com) that 
> they configured 2 zones like 128/27.x.x.x.in-addr.arpa and one as 
> 128-27.x.x.x.in-addr.arpa, so my server was not able to answer queries 
> because I had all zones 128/27.x.x.x.in-addr.arpa.
> As said before it is my first time configuring Bind and I am sure the more 
> experienced would have notice and solved it quite soon, but still I wonder 
> why to use different convention (without telling us) and even if this is 
> correct (red the http://rfc.net/rfc2317.html and they always use "/" not "-" 
> ).
> Hope I won't be banned from the list for this email......
>
> Thanks for your time reading this
>
> Simone
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>