Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 22 Apr 1999 14:10:00 -0700
From:      "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com>
To:        "Jason Canon" <jcanon@comtechnologies.com>
Cc:        "Igor Roshchin" <igor@physics.uiuc.edu>, <stable@freebsd.org>
Subject:   RE: netstat -r
Message-ID:  <000201be8d04$7b81ead0$021d85d1@whenever.youwant.to>
In-Reply-To: <371F8E10.F57F11A@comtechnologies.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Ok,
>
> I have to concede that it is impossible to argue scientifically
> against with a
> position
> that says "It was working by pure luck...".   Either you forgot
> that the Internet
> ran for about a decade before DNS came along or perhaps the word "newby"
> (as in you were not around then) may be applicable.

	Umm, no I was there actually.

> Otherwise, perhaps you can quote the applicable RFC and/or BSD
> documentation that
> supports your assertion that it is a requirement that networks
> operate a private DNS
> server.

	Gladly. RFC1597 states:

   Because private addresses have no global meaning, routing information
   about private networks shall not be propagated on inter-enterprise
   links, and packets with private source or destination addresses
   should not be forwarded across such links.  Routers in networks not
   using private address space, especially those of Internet service
   providers, are expected to be configured to reject (filter out)
   routing information about private networks.  If such a router
   receives such information the rejection shall not be treated as a
   routing protocol error.

   Indirect references to such addresses should be contained within the
   enterprise.  Prominent examples of such references are DNS Resource
   Records and other information referring to internal private
   addresses.  In particular, Internet service providers should take
   measures to prevent such leakage.

	Read over the second paragraph a few times until you understand it. I'll
wait.

> Agreeably, the configuration requirements, for those who
> choose to run DNS,
> for both public gateway and private network domains is widely
> known so all you need
> to cite is the standard that says /etc/hosts is insufficient because (x).

	I'm not saying there's any such requirement. I'm simply saying that it's
erroneous to rely upon private IPs resolving or not resolving in any
particular way on the global Internet.

	I will repeat, it is an error to use private IPs in any way on the global
Internet. That includes attempting to resolve them using the Internet's DNS
system. They are supposed to be quarantined. If you choose to use DNS and
you choose to use private address space, you are supposed to make sure they
don't conflict.

	David Schwartz



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?000201be8d04$7b81ead0$021d85d1>