If my memory serves me correctly, I've run into performance problems with both NFS and HP's omniback product that were caused by missing reverse records.
Mike Ring CISSP IT Security Specialist PresGar Companies -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Schmehl Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 10:58 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [Full-disclosure] Reverse dns Is there an RFC *requirement* for reverse dns? I've been looking through the RFCs and I can't find it. Some folks think reverse dns should be completely disabled. I know for sure that this will break email, because many mail servers won't talk to a server that doesn't reverse. Tcpdump also doesn't like hosts that won't reverse. What I'm looking for is a standard (RFC) that states that enabling reverse lookups is *required* or reverse lookups are *optional*. If they're optional, then reverse could be disabled for most hosts. I'm also looking for a list of things that *break* when you disable reverse (e.g. mail). RULES FOR RESPONDING: 1) "Reverse is a good thing" is not an answer. Neither is "Reverse is a bad thing". 2) Opinions are not useful - stick to facts only - chapter and verse please. 3) All replies to the list please - others will find this useful as well. Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Adjunct Information Security Officer The University of Texas at Dallas AVIEN Founding Member http://www.utdallas.edu _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://www.secunia.com/ _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://www.secunia.com/
