[ga] Secure Dynamic DNS Update does not actually work

["Jim Fleming" <jfleming@anet.com>]

Re: persistent domain names

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

To: Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca>
Subject: Re: persistent domain names
From: RJ Atkinson <rja@inet.org>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 13:51:50 -0500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

At 22:14 30/10/01, Michael Richardson wrote:
>The major obstucle is the "IPtelcos"/CableCos
>who aren't being very retinscent to actually let people being peers rather
>than just client-consumers. There is, with dynamic DNS update no reason why
>they should not permit people with "always-on" IPs to populate the reverse
>DNS.

        Secure Dynamic DNS Update does not actually work
operationally in most deployed DNS systems, so I don't
think that such an approach is operationally feasible
today.

        Details of how/why Secure Dynamic DNS Update is
problematic are best discussed on a mailing list devoted
to DNSsec, IMHO.

Ran
rja@inet.org



--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html