Absolutely. I generally delegate to internal NS from the public zone, and be 
done with it. This takes care of most use cases without all sorts of 
split-brain nonsense. It "just works" any time the client has permission to 
reach the listed resources- from colos, vpns, partners, peered vpcs, whatever.  
Of course this assumes prudent restrictions on connectivity. 

I wasn't endorsing verio's implementation, just their use of a subdomain.

Matt

> On Jun 24, 2014, at 1:58 PM, Doug Barton <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Yes, that's very poorly done. The proper way to do that would have been to 
> make the zone authoritative on their internal resolvers, and skipped the 
> delegation records in the parent altogether.
> 
> Doug
> 
> 
>> On 06/24/2014 01:38 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
>> 
>>> On Jun 24, 2014, at 4:29 PM, Matthew Ghali <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi PHB- I'm curious when this scheme would be simpler to implement or less 
>>> expensive to operate as opposed to using a delegated internal subdomain of 
>>> an existing parent domain registration (see corp.verio.net modulo the 
>>> psychopathic NS rrset). I'm certainly no authority but everyone seems to 
>>> have a much more complicated solution to what I've always found to be a 
>>> simple problem. Is it the old "never expose 1918 addresses in public DNS" 
>>> fetish, or the related "must not expose secret internal names via DNS" 
>>> paranoia?
>> 
>> It's possible to have an 'internally' visible zone, but the 'corp.verio.net' 
>> example I provided is somewhat like the worst of both worlds.  You detail a 
>> lot about your zone and internal server IPs without any security benefit at 
>> all.
>> 
>> One should (ideally) not respond with ULA or 1918 addresses in your AAAA or 
>> A responses as the behavior can be undefined.
>> 
>> What you don't want is to be delegating everything so far that you may have 
>> a host querying for an internal resource sending everyone talking to their 
>> own local 10.x DNS server because of the way you established NS records.
>> 
>> Your VPN and internal resolvers can be an authority on "corp.example.com" 
>> without exposing that to the broader internet.
>> 
>> - jared
> 

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
dns-operations mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations
dns-jobs mailing list
https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-jobs

Reply via email to