Hi,
I have trouble to activate my Cisco NCS5xxx Devices.
Turns out that tools.cisco.com. resolves to either 173.37.145.8 (this
works) or 72.163.4.38 (which was decommissioned earlier this year).
By running
dig A tools.cisco.com @alln01-ucs-dcz03n-gslb1-snip.cisco.com
four times I can
In message
In message <50298399-672d-4ba1-a726-7128b84b8...@apple.com>, Matt Peterman
writes:
> Got it! Youâre the winner here. I just setup both of my zones the name
> way and obviously AT changed the way they did RDNS entries from when I
> got a /25 last November and this second /25 in June. Oh well!
>
Yep, the notation with the slash used to be ATT's standard method. At my
job (where we had some customers with ATT MIS T1 circuits) we transitioned
to a web front end for our DNS that didn't allow for the slash, so we had
to nudge ATT to allow us to use a dash notation instead for delegations.
As
I can now confirm that Christopher is right about everything (not that I had
any doubts! Just wanted to confirm all is working!!)
ATT is now following the RFC (apparently has changed since November 2016 and
June 2017 allocations and DNS changes) and that Route53 WebUI displays things
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 11:18 PM, Matt Peterman wrote:
> Got it! You’re the winner here. I just setup both of my zones the name way
> and obviously AT changed the way they did RDNS entries from when I got a
> /25 last November and this second /25 in June. Oh well!
>
> Now I
gt; $ dig +short CNAME 128.168.207.107.in-addr.arpa
>> 128.128/25.168.207.107.in-addr.arpa.
>>
>> Which is obviously a completely invalid DNS entry. I have opened a ticket
>> through the web portal for “prov-dns” but Haven’t gotten a response for 7
>> days.
>>
>
gt;> The PTR record CNAMEs for my /25 allocated prefix are all messed up. They
>> are returning as
>> $ dig +short CNAME 128.168.207.107.in-addr.arpa
>> 128.128/25.168.207.107.in-addr.arpa.
>>
>> Which is obviously a completely invalid DNS entry. I have opened a ticket
>>
returning as
>> $ dig +short CNAME 128.168.207.107.in-addr.arpa
>> 128.128/25.168.207.107.in-addr.arpa.
>>
>> Which is obviously a completely invalid DNS entry. I have opened a ticket
>> through the web portal for “prov-dns” but Haven’t gotten a response for 7
&
68.207.107.in-addr.arpa
> 128.128/25.168.207.107.in-addr.arpa.
>
> Which is obviously a completely invalid DNS entry. I have opened a ticket
> through the web portal for “prov-dns” but Haven’t gotten a response for 7
> days.
>
> If anyone from AT DNS or knows anyone from AT
e opened a ticket
> through the web portal for “prov-dns” but Haven’t gotten a response for 7
> days.
>
> If anyone from AT DNS or knows anyone from AT DNS that can help it would
> be appreciated!
>
>
> isn't this one of the proper forms of reverse delegation in
s obviously a completely invalid DNS entry. I have opened a ticket
> through the web portal for “prov-dns” but Haven’t gotten a response for 7
> days.
>
> If anyone from AT DNS or knows anyone from AT DNS that can help it
> would be appreciated!
>
>
isn't this one of the proper fo
” but Haven’t gotten a response for 7 days.
If anyone from AT DNS or knows anyone from AT DNS that can help it would be
appreciated!
Matt
13 matches
Mail list logo