Re-writing RFC1918 addresses? [Was: Re: Looking for way to mark a zone no-xfer for a sub-domain .]

Joseph S D Yao jsdy at cospo.osis.gov
Wed Sep 13 14:10:13 UTC 2000


On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 02:44:35AM -0700, Bill Manning wrote:
> This is the type of mail I get -all the time- because I'm the hostmaster
> for RFC 1918 space.  NATs allow the mail to proceed into the Internet
> with the source address intact. In spirit, this violates RFC 1918
> in that |the addresses are "leaked" into the Internet and clueless
> folk send me threatening letters.   I'd really like NATs to rewrite
> the SMTP headers.
> 
> But we digress.... back to your regularly scheduled program.

OH!  You were quoting something!  I don't think anybody picked that up.

Maybe all of us who mailed Jeff a message need to apologize.  ;-/

Pardon me while I cc the list.

I'm not yet awake enough to see a clear solution to this dilemma, if
there is one.  It's also a violation of some RFC to mess with the
"Received: " header lines.  The addresses aren't "leaked" per se, at
least not in IP headers.  The true solution is adding clue to people
universally.  Before someone is allowed to administer a machine, they
should take SAGE's "Am I really a System Administrator"? test - and
PASS.  But this would deprive us of 80% of system administrators
worldwide, and perhaps 98% of MSW system administrators.

In My Humble and Probably Incorrect and Definitely Biased Opinion.

-- 
Joe Yao				jsdy at cospo.osis.gov - Joseph S. D. Yao
COSPO/OSIS Computer Support					EMT-B
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This message is not an official statement of COSPO policies.



More information about the bind-users mailing list