Re: [DNSOP] Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-dnsop-reflectors-are-evil (Preventing Use of Recursive Nameservers in Reflector Attacks) to BCP

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

 




On 28-Sep-2007, at 1136, Paul Hoffman wrote:

It is not "obvious", at least to some of the people I have spoken with. It is also not obvious to VPN vendors; otherwise, they would have easy-to-use settings to make it happen.

I'm surprised by that comment.

I think it's a common use case that organisations who deploy VPNs have split DNS; that is, namespaces available through internal network resolvers that do not appear in the global namespace. In my experience, it is normal for:

- VPN client software to use IP addresses rather than names to establish a secure tunnel with the home network - Local resolver settings on the VPN client's machine to be re- written to use internal home network nameservers while the VPN session is active

This is certainly how the cisco VPN client supplied to me by my employer (and the subsequent versions I've downloaded directly from cisco) work, for example. I was under the impression that cisco had fairly significant market share in this area.

This is not to say that the topic doesn't deserve mention in the draft at hand. However, your logic in the last sentence above seems suspect to me.


Joe


_______________________________________________

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]