Messages On Startup

Kevin Darcy kcd at daimlerchrysler.com
Fri Aug 20 00:51:17 UTC 2004


Barry Margolin wrote:

>In article <cg3dbh$17bj$1 at sf1.isc.org>,
> Kevin Darcy <kcd at daimlerchrysler.com> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Mark Andrews wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>Well, technically, underscore is invalid in a "host name", and some 
>>>>ancient versions of BIND (like the buggy, insecure version you're using) 
>>>>actually try to enforce this restriction.
>>>>
>>>>Upgrade. Later versions of BIND gave up trying to police hostname 
>>>>restrictions.
>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>	By popular demand check-names is supported in BIND 9.3.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>One can only hope that the default setting is sensible.
>>
>>    
>>
>>>	The correct fix is to get rid of the illegal hostname.
>>>	If you want to be on the Internet you need to play by
>>>	the rules of the Internet.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>Is BIND "the Internet"? Why then does it presume to enforce "the 
>>Internet"'s rules? The DNS protocol itself has no problems with 
>>underscores, and IMO that's all BIND should be concerned with. Not to 
>>mention the fact that BIND and DNS are also run on intranets where "the 
>>Internet"'s rules don't apply...
>>    
>>
>
>That's why there's a configuration option.  Since BIND is usually used 
>on Internet hosts, it's not unreasonable for the default setting to 
>match this use.
>
"Usually"? I have 4 production nameservers serving DNS to the Internet 
and 50+ nameservers serving the intranet.  I think most enterprise 
customers have a similar ratio, or even more lopsided...

                                                                         
                                       - Kevin




More information about the bind-users mailing list