nslookup from WinNT machine

[Kevin Darcy]

pelln at icke-reklam.ipsec.nu.invalid wrote:

> Kevin Darcy <kcd at daimlerchrysler.com> wrote:
>
> > Brad Knowles wrote:
>
> >> At 11:11 AM -0700 5/24/01, Ravi Nair wrote:
> >>
> >>         Of course, you'll probably want to get reverse DNS for this IP
> >> address (and your others) fixed, so that you don't have these kinds
> >> of problems.  Indeed, broken reverse DNS is probably still one of the
> >> single biggest problems on the 'net these days.  Sigh....
>
> > Or, one of the biggest non-problems, depending on one's point of view. IMO,
> > no-one should be authenticating by reverse lookup, and as for mapping
> > individual addresses to netblocks, well, that hardly calls for the
> > maintenance of millions of PTR records when a few thousand (okay, maybe tens
> > of thousands of) netblock records will suffice. And netblock records give you
> > *better* information anyway, like the names and numbers of those responsible
> > for the netblock.
>
> > I agree that functional reverse lookups are a nice *convenience*. But that's
> > as far as I'd go. I certainly wouldn't consider them mandatory. Incorrect
> > delegation and glue records rank *much* higher on my list of Internet DNS pet
> > peeves...
>
> Even if delegation and glue records is more importent, lack of proper PTR
> is a sign of negligence and ignorance. It's no point in implementing
> just parts of DNS, ignoring what you don't feel is importent.

Well, I don't maintain HINFO or WKS records, is that a sign of my negligence or
ignorance?


- Kevin