[dns-wg] Policy for Reverse DNS for End-User PA Addresses?
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] Policy for Reverse DNS for End-User PA Addresses?
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] Policy for Reverse DNS for End-User PA Addresses?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jon Lawrence
jon at lawrence.org.uk
Fri Jul 9 22:52:55 CEST 2004
On Friday 09 July 2004 21:14, Jørgen Elgaard Larsen wrote: > Jon Lawrence wrote: > > ISP's/LIR's should be required to provide reverse DNS. Even if it's just > > a generic reverse such as adsl-xx-xx.isp.com > > Although generic reverses does help in some ways, it could also be > argued that they do not provide much real information. In my opinion it > will only make sense to make reverse DNS mandatory, if the end user can > decide that the information should be useful, i.e. that addresses > resolve to corresponding canonical hostnames. yes and no :) It make sense to make reverse dns mandatory even if it's only a *generic* reverse. For one thing, I see plenty of emails coming through are servers (and some of them are genuine) which come from addresses with absolutely no reverse. I'd rather the reverse was relevant, but a *generic* is better than nothing. > > > No privacy issues aren't irrelevant. > > When I got my IP range at home, I wasn't informed that my details could > > potentially appear in a public registry - they didn't in the end, > > although there is an inetnum for my range it's fully admin'd by my ISP > > and doesn't contain any of my details. > > Privacy issues must be addressed, and there is actually no reason why the > > end user's details need to be associated with the inetnum. > > Sorry, I did not mean that privacy issues are irrelevant. > > What I (and the draft) ment was that there are no privacy issues with > reverse DNS as long as you can find the end user for an IP address > through whois. You don't necessarily need to be able to find the end user directly from the whois, so long as the whois points you in the right direction - ie the ISP. Ultimately, the whois always points you in the right direction, even if that means you end up complaining to the LIR directly :) > Whether the whois database should allow anonymised inetnum objects is > another discussion. Indeed it is another discussion but I for one see nothing intriniscally wrong with it - depending upon the degree on anonimity. I think the inetnum for my home range (81.168.4.64/29) is a good example of how to put in place an anonymous (as far as the end user is concerned) inetnum. > Thanks for pointing that out - I had not thought of that, since I > started the other way around, wanting to ensure that end users could > have relevant reverse DNS if they wanted. We also do the same. If someone wants to have a relevant reverse DNS then they get it - we may request proof that they own the domain name that they want it pointing to ;) but the customer gets what they want. Even if they don't want it, they may get it - All be it, it might just be their initials prefixed to our domain - it makes associating entries in log files to users a lot easier. So what if it's a bit more work for me to setup, in the long run I believe it saves me headaches. Jon
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] Policy for Reverse DNS for End-User PA Addresses?
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] Policy for Reverse DNS for End-User PA Addresses?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]