Hello,
[ insert decent apology here if this is unrelated. ]
I am trying to find out whether there is anything special regarding zz.com that
anyone who has seen attacks against their hosted dns servers.
If there is anything you can think of please feel free to reply me offlist.
thanks
Mehmet
On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, Douglas Otis wrote:
>
> To avoid server access and hitting roots:
>
> host-1.example.com. IN A 192.0.2.0
> host-10.example.com. IN A 192.0.2.9
>
> example.com. IN MX 0 host-1.example.com.
> example.com. IN MX 90 host-10.example.com.
This is not very good from the point of vi
on Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 09:27:06PM -0500, Mike Lieman wrote:
> >
> > ...and if people used "static" and "dynamic" keywords in DNS as I suggested
> > in my previously mentioned draft,
>
> What are the words for "static" and "dynamic" in Lower Sorbian?
I was bored so I looked them up. :-)
dynamic:
> dynamic: dynamika
> static: statik
>
One wonders how this will be handled when the flood of non-Latin domains
starts. Are these RBL maintainers really going to figure out how many
different ways there are to say the (English/Latin) equivalent of
"static" in Chinese, Cyrillic, Swahili, etc.
On 12/17/09 4:54 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, Douglas Otis wrote:
To avoid server access and hitting roots:
host-1.example.com. IN A 192.0.2.0
host-10.example.com. IN A 192.0.2.9
example.com.IN MX 0 host-1.example.com.
example.com.IN MX 90 host-10.example.com.
This is
Silly question: how well would using 1.0.0.257.in-addr.arpa match the
need identified in draft-jabley-sink-arpa ?
It seems like it would be equally well guaranteed to be non-existant
(short of change in the def of IPv4 and in-addr.arpa). Like
sink.arpa, it would get you a valid SOA and nothing el
On 2009-12-17, at 23:16, Ted Hardie wrote:
> Silly question: how well would using 1.0.0.257.in-addr.arpa match the
> need identified in draft-jabley-sink-arpa ?
>
> It seems like it would be equally well guaranteed to be non-existant
> (short of change in the def of IPv4 and in-addr.arpa). Like
Joe Abley wrote:
> On 2009-12-17, at 23:16, Ted Hardie wrote:
>
>> Silly question: how well would using 1.0.0.257.in-addr.arpa match the
>> need identified in draft-jabley-sink-arpa ?
>>
>> It seems like it would be equally well guaranteed to be non-existant
>> (short of change in the def of IPv4
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 03:16:12PM -0800, Ted Hardie wrote:
> Silly question: how well would using 1.0.0.257.in-addr.arpa match the
> need identified in draft-jabley-sink-arpa ?
>
> It seems like it would be equally well guaranteed to be non-existant
> (short of change in the def of IPv4 and in-ad
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 06:43:36PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> Joe Abley wrote:
> > On 2009-12-17, at 23:16, Ted Hardie wrote:
> >
> >> Silly question: how well would using 1.0.0.257.in-addr.arpa match the
> >> need identified in draft-jabley-sink-arpa ?
> >>
> >> It seems like it would be equally
Hi Nanogers,
I am preparing for my CCIE Voice lab, which needs voice equipment hands on
practice, and i don't have enough money to pursue that. Would it be possible
if someone has spare phones like Cisco 7960g, PVDM modules, fxo/fxs VICs,
mc3810 voice gateway, Digium T1/E1 card, 2621/3640 router o
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 6:54 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, Douglas Otis wrote: > more polite to use a nonexistent
> name that you control, but that doesn't allow the source MTA to skip
> further DNS lookups
If you want to be kind, point the MX to an A record that resolves to
In message <6eb799ab0912172126g1eac7e49ve8f803552f6db...@mail.gmail.com>, James
Hess writes:
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 6:54 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
> > On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, Douglas Otis wrote: > more polite to use a nonexisten
> t name that you control, but that doesn't allow the source MTA to
I would suggest renting the gear with rack time
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 11:37 PM, itservices88 wrote:
> Hi Nanogers,
>
> I am preparing for my CCIE Voice lab, which needs voice equipment hands on
> practice, and i don't have enough money to pursue that. Would it be
> possible
> if someone has
14 matches
Mail list logo
