Ted Lemon wrote:
On Feb 1, 2018, at 3:41 PM, Andrew Sullivan <a...@anvilwalrusden.com
I think that this is an example of attempting to
do so: to make a name that already appears today in the DNS
(localhost) go away.
Okay, but this simply isn't true. I think you actually responded to the
dig traces I sent earlier. The root servers securely deny the existence
of localhost. Existing practice is that localhost does not appear in the
DNS. The fact that the RFCs currently differ from existing practice is a
problem that the current document is trying to solve.
the root zone has never supported this.
whereas, every rdns server i've operated since 1987 has supported this.
so you may be arguing past each other as to whether localhost does or
does not "appear in the dns".
since we're talking about dig, here's mine. i do localhost with RPZ now.
; <<>> DiG 9.9.5-3ubuntu0.17-Ubuntu <<>> localhost
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 58186
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 1
;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;localhost. IN A
;; ANSWER SECTION:
localhost. 5 IN A 127.0.0.1
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
dns-policy.vix.com. 30 IN NS localhost.
;; Query time: 47 msec
;; SERVER: 22.214.171.124#53(126.96.36.199)
;; WHEN: Thu Feb 01 17:35:27 STD 2018
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 86
i think if you want to stop people from asking the localhost question in
dns, you can recommend that operating system libraries work that way,
and there will probably be uptake.
but if you want to stop people from answering it, that's an on-wire
change from "isn't causing complaints" to "unknown", which isn't strong
motivation, and in any case, is not enforceable.
i have not seen an explaination of why you're fixing what you think is a
bug in gethostbyname() by asking for changes to online dns configs.
DNSOP mailing list