> > I would like to add that many T-1 lines have rDNS entries "lumped" > > together with DSL. Our ISP (which is not exactly a "small" ISP) returns > > a standard rDNS response for every IP they own (and give to their > > customers). They all contain the three letters "DSL". So we are > > getting caught up in this storm and are on a T-1. > > Then your ISP is lazy, and sloppy. If I put equipment on my network here (at > AOL) then it better be named right in both forward and reverse lookups. When > using generic rDNS for blocks of things I at least take the time to make > sure I don't name something a name that it is not. Doesn't it make things > difficult for troubleshooting when you have sloppy naming of interfaces?
What about PacBell? While I did not have a problem with them on DNS, as they delegated control of the rDNS for the IPs we had to me, the block was listed in 2 DUL lists because all PacBell blocks are. While it never caused a problem, the potential is there. I guess my point is that even though this concerns the rDNS record, what if the next step was checking to see if the IP was listed in a DUL list? Do you really think PacBell would care and change? John Tolmachoff MCSE CSSA Engineer/Consultant eServices For You www.eservicesforyou.com To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
