FW: BIND limits and performance questions
brad.knowles at skynet.be
Fri Mar 23 22:44:54 UTC 2001
At 5:09 PM -0500 3/23/01, Gary wrote:
> For instance, say AOL does something that isn't exactly according to the
> standards and if you strictly obey the standards and your customers can't
> send or receive e-mail to their friends at AOL then it won't be long till
> you don't have any customers. So if you want to stay in business you have
> to go according to what AOL, in this example, does.
What AOL does now will no longer work at all with BINDv9. IMO,
it's long past time.
After the problem I previously mentioned (where I was personally
blamed for taking out all e-mail throughout the entire world, due to
the 19-hour downtime during AOL's "Black Wednesday" failure), I had
actually fixed this problem with mechanisms that were a little
strange, but perfectly legal according to the RFCs.
However, after I left AOL, someone apparently decided to go back
to the old mechanism which violates the RFCs (it points MXes at CNAME
records). Fortunately, a good friend of mine is now in charge of the
DNS at AOL, they're starting to use the BINDv9 tools to validate
their zones, and maybe I can convince him to fix this problem with a
more appropriate mechanism.
Brad Knowles, <brad.knowles at skynet.be>
/* efdtt.c Author: Charles M. Hannum <root at ihack.net> */
/* Represented as 1045 digit prime number by Phil Carmody */
/* Prime as DNS cname chain by Roy Arends and Walter Belgers */
/* Usage is: cat title-key scrambled.vob | efdtt >clear.vob */
/* where title-key = "153 2 8 105 225" or other similar 5-byte key */
dig decss.friet.org|perl -ne's/\.//;print pack("H124",$1)if(/^x([^\.]*)/)'
More information about the bind-users