Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.networking > #1490

Re: "Timeout" DNS IP to name resolution

Show all headers | View raw

Moe Trin <ibuprofin@painkiller.example.tld.invalid> wrote in 
news:slrnjueetk.k4l.ibuprofin@fermi.phx.az.us:

> The DNS RFCs were written before RFC2119 (Key words for use in RFCs 
to
> Indicate Requirement Levels) so there isn't a specific sentence that
> says PTR records "MUST" (or even "SHOULD") exist.
> 
>>I had a quick look through RFCs 1034 and 1035 yesterday evening but
>>couldn't a definite statement.
> 
>   RFC 2050    Internet Registry IP Allocation Guidelines  section 5
>   RFC 2181    Clarifications to the DNS Specification     section 
10.2
>   RFC 2317    Classless IN-ADDR.ARPA delegation           entire 
doc.
> 
> none of which are "STANDARD" track documents.
> 
>>In your situation I suspect that my *opinion* is irrelevant, but 
FWIW
>>I would say that you *should* get some sort of response for any DNS
>>enquiry, whether forward or reverse.
> 
> It seems that things fall into three main classes:
> 
>   1. That information is SECRET - I don't want you to know it
>   2. It's too HARD to set up
>   3. What's a reverse zone
> 
> This has been an on-going problem for many years - mail 
administrators
> often configure their mail servers to reject mail from systems that
> don't resolve, or where the forward and reverse names don't match 
up.
> See question 3.22 in the Sendmail-FAQ as one example.

[Moe Trin|Olg Guy]
Thanks.

My reading of 1035 says NO, reverse is not required, but others 
disagree so what do I know?!  All the RFCs I read that talk about 
Email say that rDNS is NOT required, so I presume that the same goes 
for http.

Pascal & Chris,

Thanks.  I changed to a different nameserver and get the expected 
results.

I'm confounded because only 4 netblocks (so far) were timing out, but 
since they no longer do I really don't care to pursue this.
--
buck

Back to comp.os.linux.networking | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

"Timeout" DNS IP to name resolution buck <buck@private.mil> - 2012-06-23 17:56 +0000
  Re: "Timeout" DNS IP to name resolution Chris Davies <chris-usenet@roaima.co.uk> - 2012-06-23 22:29 +0100
    Re: "Timeout" DNS IP to name resolution buck <buck@private.mil> - 2012-06-24 01:05 +0000
      Re: "Timeout" DNS IP to name resolution Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2012-06-24 11:52 +0200
      Re: "Timeout" DNS IP to name resolution Chris Davies <chris-usenet@roaima.co.uk> - 2012-06-24 12:15 +0100
        Re: "Timeout" DNS IP to name resolution Moe Trin <ibuprofin@painkiller.example.tld.invalid> - 2012-06-24 11:09 -0500
          Re: "Timeout" DNS IP to name resolution buck <buck@private.mil> - 2012-06-24 19:50 +0000
            Re: "Timeout" DNS IP to name resolution Moe Trin <ibuprofin@painkiller.example.tld.invalid> - 2012-06-24 19:12 -0500
              Re: "Timeout" DNS IP to name resolution J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2012-06-25 10:22 +0000
  Re: "Timeout" DNS IP to name resolution MJ <me@invalid.org> - 2012-06-27 07:44 +0000
    Re: "Timeout" DNS IP to name resolution buck <buck@private.mil> - 2012-06-29 17:00 +0000
      Re: "Timeout" DNS IP to name resolution Joe Beanfish <joebeanfish@nospam.duh> - 2012-06-29 15:43 -0400
        Re: "Timeout" DNS IP to name resolution buck <buck@private.mil> - 2012-06-30 20:04 +0000
  Re: "Timeout" DNS IP to name resolution Martijn Lievaart <m@rtij.nl.invlalid> - 2012-06-30 00:58 +0200

csiph-web