reverse dns problems

[Will Yardley]

Michael Kjorling wrote:
> And how would you go about resolving names in the 208.21.15.0/25
> network, when your server is set as authorative for reverse DNS on
> 208.21.15.128/25 and in effect all of 208.21.15/24?

On a theoretical level, this is probably a Bad Thing, but there are worse
things that could happen in a lot of practical situations.

What if you did the cname hack bacwkards for the rest of the zones (ie
use $GENERATE to make CNAMES to a seperate zone for the rest of the class C
and then delegated those back to the ISP)?  Would that break anything?

It seems like CIDR is enough of a reality now that there should be a more
elegant solution than the CNAME hack; why isn't it possible to incorporate
some way to create at least a slightly less complex hack into bind 9?

Not that i'm volunteering to code it or anything :>

w