On 10 Feb 07, at 18:58, Adam Chlipala wrote:
> How do y'all think we should handle reverse DNS for our new
> servers? We
> can have Peer 1's servers handle the requests by giving them the
> individual mappings, or we can ask for a delegation to our DNS
> servers.
> Acting alone, I would choose the first option now, because we don't
> expect to change the mappings often, and why _not_ get their
> servers to
> handle the traffic, right?
>
> In any case, let me see if I've correctly understood which IP
> addresses
> deserve reverse-resolvable names. We have deleuze (main server), mire
> (member dynamic content server), and baltar (switch), each of which
> already has a hcoop.net forward mapping (with DNS hosted on
> fyodor/Abulafia for now). Would we want any reverse DNS mappings
> beyond
> these?
You definitely want any outbound SMTP servers to have reverse DNS
records ("PTR records"). The others are a good idea, but not
strictly necessary.
In the spirit of cooperation among cooperatives, I'd be happy to
provide complimentary primary, secondary, forward and/or reverse DNS
service for you, using our current DNS servers in San Francisco and
London and any future DNS servers we deploy elsewhere in the world.
Graham Freeman
General Manager, Cernio Technology Cooperative
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.cernio.com
+1 415 462 2991 home office
_______________________________________________
HCoop-SysAdmin mailing list
[email protected]
http://hcoop.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hcoop-sysadmin
