Re: DNS pollution

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



	Actually if you had read the followup this was not a
	application error but a operator error.  Operator errors
	are exactly what this misbehaviour depends on.  This a
	perfectly good example of unexpected consequences.

	Note this also breaks the expectations of RFC 1123

           If a dotted-decimal number can be entered without such
           identifying delimiters, then a full syntactic check must be
           made, because a segment of a host domain name is now allowed
           to begin with a digit and could legally be entirely numeric
(see Section 6.1.2.4). However, a valid host name can never have the dotted-decimal form #.#.#.#, since at least the
           highest-level component label will be alphabetic.

	This implies that entering a address query for #.#.#.# will
	NOT return a RRset.

except that resolver libraries routinely tack on a domain suffix before sending the query. so the query isn't for #.#.#.#, it's for #.#.#.#.some-domain.com. and this is actually part of the problem. in my experience, earthlink's servers often (correctly) don't respond for queries for a particular domain without the suffix, but do respond with bogus RRs for queries that have the suffix tacked on. I'm not sure why the servers act differently between the two cases, but I've seen it happen enough to make me think there's a real correlation.

Keith



_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]