RFC 6303 vs. BIND: NS ... has no address records (A or AAAA)
Doug Barton
dougb at dougbarton.us
Wed Jan 11 18:57:17 UTC 2012
Apples and oranges. The things listed below are actual bogons. Compare
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/etc/namedb/named.conf?rev=1.36
Doug
On 1/11/2012 9:15 AM, Sten Carlsen wrote:
> Hi
>
> Good news is that you should simplify your bogon list, lots of those
> addresses are now actually in use; e.g. I have regular visits on my
> pages by 2.x.x.x as they are now mostly handed out (local ISP here) and
> in legitimate use.
>
> On 11/01/12 16:05, Tony Finch wrote:
>> Matus UHLAR - fantomas <uhlar at fantomas.sk> wrote:
>>> I prefer defining 127.in-addr.arpa and inside:
>>>
>>> 1.0.0 PTR localhost.
>> I used to do that, but I need fewer zone files if I use the same reverse
>> zone for v6 and v4 :-) I have fairly extensive setup for bogons, and I
>> have set up empty zones to cover the same ranges, except for the multicast
>> range 224.0.0.0/4 (which has reverse DNS but no DNS servers), and our
>> internal RFC 1918 zones.
>>
>> server 0.0.0.0/8 { bogus yes; };
>> server 10.0.0.0/8 { bogus yes; };
>> server 127.0.0.0/8 { bogus yes; };
>> server 169.254.0.0/16 { bogus yes; };
>> server 172.16.0.0/12 { bogus yes; };
>> server 192.0.0.0/24 { bogus yes; };
>> server 192.0.2.0/24 { bogus yes; };
>> server 192.88.99.0/24 { bogus yes; };
>> server 192.168.0.0/16 { bogus yes; };
>> server 198.18.0.0/15 { bogus yes; };
>> server 198.51.100.0/24 { bogus yes; };
>> server 203.0.113.0/24 { bogus yes; };
>> server 224.0.0.0/3 { bogus yes; };
>>
>> server 0000::/3 { bogus yes; };
>> server 2001:0010::/28 { bogus yes; };
>> server 2001:0db8::/32 { bogus yes; };
>> server 3000::/4 { bogus yes; };
>> server 4000::/2 { bogus yes; };
>> server 8000::/1 { bogus yes; };
--
You can observe a lot just by watching. -- Yogi Berra
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
More information about the bind-users
mailing list