Hello,
I searched if this issue has been around previously, but neither
google or Nanog list search produced anything recent and
relevant. There has been some discussion on whois host entries etc,
however.
The real issue, why this seems impossible with many registrars, is
explained in the end
And now the problem with some registrars (or is it the same with all
of them):
godaddy.com:
Does only allow to use registered hosts as name servers in .com and
.net domains. If the name server host is in com or net domain and it
is not in the same domain, it needs to be a registered
On 2 Mar 2004, at 19:06, Antti Louko wrote:
And now the problem with some registrars (or is it the same with all
of them):
godaddy.com:
Does only allow to use registered hosts as name servers in .com and
.net domains.
This is a requirement of Verisign registry, and should be true for all
Does only allow to use registered hosts as name servers
in .com and .net domains.
This is a requirement of Verisign registry, and should be
true for all net/com registrars.
s;net/com;;
presuming you mean that there should be registered host rr
for all known servers. otherwise, i suspect
On 2 Mar 2004, at 21:02, Randy Bush wrote:
Does only allow to use registered hosts as name servers
in .com and .net domains.
This is a requirement of Verisign registry, and should be
true for all net/com registrars.
s;net/com;;
presuming you mean that there should be registered host rr
for all
quote who=Randy Bush
i would not be unhappy if the
registrar or registry would test this occasionally.
For what values of occasionally?
And for what operational benefit? Removal of the record(s) certainly
wouldn't be appropriate so what would you like to see happen?
A CIDR Report style
presuming you mean that there should be registered host rr
for all known servers. otherwise, i suspect the servfails
will get even worse.
sadly, forcing an A RR does not ensure that the server is
in fact serving the zone. i would not be unhappy if the
registrar or registry would test
i would not be unhappy if the registrar or registry would test
this occasionally.
For what values of occasionally?
i can thing of a lot of values more interesting than zero
And for what operational benefit? Removal of the record(s)
certainly wouldn't be appropriate
why not? what is the
On Tue, 2 Mar 2004, David A. Ulevitch wrote:
A CIDR Report style email to nanog-l? *yawn*
You mean http://www.cymru.com/DNS/lame.html ? Team Cymru have been doing
that for ages. Doesn't actually force the issue anywhere, but it does get
checked and published, using contributed resolver
quote who=Randy Bush
And for what operational benefit? Removal of the record(s)
certainly wouldn't be appropriate
why not? what is the use of a zone that is not being served?
A query not being answered to you or the verifier is not the same thing
as a zone not being served. (I would
10 matches
Mail list logo
