Hello,
On 6 Sep 2017, at 16:00, tjw ietf wrote:
When the idea of having a Call for Adoption for this document came up,
we
thought long and hard about this one. However, the comments from the
working group focused this document to address the specific issue of
the
local hostname.
This starts a formal Call for Adoption for
draft-west-let-localhost-be-localhost
The draft is available here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-west-let-localhost-be-localhost/
I support adoption of this draft.
I would also like to take this opportunity to codify a related best
operational practice. As Tony Finch mentioned elsewhere in the thread
(linking to
http://news.uis.cam.ac.uk/articles/2017/09/01/deleting-localhost-entries-from-the-cam-ac-uk-dns-zone),
having a localhost entry in any zone file is an insecure practice.
Since we are doing a draft/RFC on what localhost is and is not, I
suggest we put some text in there banning (MUST NOT) the practice of
having localhost entries (at least those pointing to 127.0.0.1/::1?) in
auth zones. If there is agreement on this I am happy to contribute text.
This may mean having to say we are updating RFC 1912.
I am happy to review in any case.
Kind regards,
--
Peter van Dijk
PowerDNS.COM BV - https://www.powerdns.com/
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
