From owner-freebsd-questions  Tue Apr  9 19:22:49 1996
Return-Path: owner-questions
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id TAA12297
          for questions-outgoing; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 19:22:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dmssyd.syd.dms.CSIRO.AU (dmssyd.syd.dms.CSIRO.AU [130.155.16.1])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA12286
          for <questions@freebsd.org>; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 19:22:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from drugs.syd.dms.CSIRO.AU 
 by dmssyd.syd.dms.CSIRO.AU (4.1/5.17)
 id AA18254; Wed, 10 Apr 96 12:21:57 EST
 (from Mark.Andrews@dms.csiro.au (Mark Andrews))
Message-Id: <9604100221.AA18254@dmssyd.syd.dms.CSIRO.AU>
To: Andrew Smith <awsmith@rip.ops.neosoft.com>
Cc: bind-users@vix.com, questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Classless DNS incompat? 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 04 Apr 1996 16:07:48 CST."
             <199604042207.QAA18118@rip.ops.neosoft.com> 
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 12:21:30 +1000
From: Mark Andrews <Mark.Andrews@dms.csiro.au>
Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


> 
> Perhaps not the best place for this question....
> 
> Nameserver:	ns.neo.net (198.64.6.1/206.109.1.1)
> 		FreeBSD 2.1-STABLE
> 		BIND 4.9.3 BETA26
> 
> FTP Server:	www.neosoft.com (206.109.1.6)
> 		FreeBSD 2.1-960102
> 
> 	I just started to change a couple of my in-addrs to
> the cidrd-classless-inaddr draft specs, but I have noticed
> that our FreeBSD WWW/FTP server running wu-ftpd 2.4 is
> refusing customers who are in the in-addr range due to
> a mismatch in the A record returned from gethostbyname()
> and the actual PTR pointed to by the CNAME from gethostbyaddr().
> For example, monster.t1.com resolves to 206.109.155.18,
> but 206.109.155.18 resolves to a CNAME 206.109.155.0.18,
> which then resolves to monster.t1.com. The resolver seems
> to not like this, returns an error, and wu-ftpd denies
> access.
> 
> 	Questions:	Is this a bug in the FreeBSD resolver?
> 
> 			Do most O/S's resolvers function like this?
> 
> 			Am I implimenting the draft method incorrectly
> 			to get responses like this?
> 
> 			Does this bode ill for common use of
> 			this draft practice? Is this a known
> 			problem that many others are experiencing?
>  
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Andrew Smith ** awsmith@neosoft.com ** Network Operations ** (713) 968-5800
>    ** "The best way to predict the future is to invent it" - Alan Kay **
>             ** http://www.neosoft.com/neosoft/staff/andrew ** 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
	Apart from a few BIND 4.9.3 BETA's I know of no resolver that
	actually breaks on the classless in-addr support. These beta's
	syslog a message like.

gethostby*.getanswer: asked for "18.155.109.206.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR", got type "CNAME"

		or

"gethostby*.getanswer: asked for "18.155.109.206.in-addr.arpa.", got "18.0.155.109.206.in-addr.arpa."

	depending on the BETA.

	BIND 4.9.2 added a spurious alias e.g. "18.155.109.206.in-addr.arpa".
	The cononical name is correct however.

	Mark
--
Mark Andrews, CSIRO Div Maths & Stats
Locked Bag 17, North Ryde, NSW 2113, Australia.
PHONE:	+61 2 325 3148			     INTERNET: marka@syd.dms.csiro.au
MOBIL:  +61 41 942 9884               UUCP:....!uunet!syd.dms.csiro.au!marka