On 10/21/2011 08:13, Keith Moore wrote:
> Names containing "." should not be subject to search lists. Given a
> name like foo.bar, there's no reliable way to tell whether "bar" is a
> TLD or a subdomain of something in the search list.
I've been following this discussion, mostly in the hopes that it would
go away. :) However since the discussion keeps circling I thought I'd
throw in my 2 cents.
1. I think we're all in agreement that dot-terminated names (e.g.,
example.) should not be subject to search lists. I personally don't have
any problems with any document mentioning that this is the expected
behavior.
2. I think most of us agree that a bare label (no dots, e.g., example)
will almost certainly be subject to a search list. My suggestion would
be that the common behavior be described in a "here be dragons" format,
without attempting to be proscriptive.
3. For hostnames with a dot (although not necessarily ending in a TLD,
such as foo.example) I think it's reasonable to say that the desired
behavior is to first try to look them up "as is" without applying a
search list, and if that fails to then apply the search list; with the
same caveat as above, descriptive language for this document instead of
proscriptive.
In regards to 3, let's say I have a domain, example.org. In my network I
have various subdomains that represent various network segments, let's
say foo, bar, and baz. Personally, I find it convenient to put
'example.com' in the search list for all of my hosts, and then type 'ssh
host.bar' and go off on my merry way. Yes, I understand that in my
simple example I could theoretically put all 3 subdomains in the search
list. Now assume that my network isn't actually that simple ...
hth,
Doug
--
Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
-- OK Go
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
