Re: [cobalt-users] bind bug on reverse dns

["Graham Scanlan" <celestineweb@xxxxxxx>]

Thanks Eddy
You have confirmed what i suspected.
Yes I was looking at 62.171.199.74 which is supposed to forward to an 
internal IP behind the firewall. (our server)
That is were ns1.oakwood.surrey.org.uk is located.
I also believe that the secondary domain ns2.granitecanyon.com is not able 
to correctly set dns record due to this problem an appears as an error.
As we are a School and about to offer broadband access to the community 
through wireless connections a possible solution would be to drop RM and set 
ourselves up as an ISP.
How difficult is this?
Finally can you recommend a good book that will cover the basics aswell as 
the more complex.

Graham






> From: "E.B. Dreger" <eddy+public+spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reply-To: cobalt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To: cobalt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [cobalt-users] bind bug on reverse dns
> Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 21:34:05 +0000 (GMT)
>
> GS> Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 22:07:42 +0100
> GS> From: Graham Scanlan
>
>
> GS> ok bit of history
>
> GS> i have been trying to get our isp (rm.net) to set up a public ip to our
> GS> server for seven months.
>
> GS> It has got to the point were i am telling them what to do when they are 
> so
> GS called experts.
>
> Sounds frustrating. :-(
>
>
> GS> if i go to dnsreport.com and run a report on oakwood-surrey.org.uk, our
> GS> domain that i am being told ns.oakwood-surrey.org.uk is authoritive
> GS> according to ISP, i get the message that there is no reverse dns setup.
>
> GS> If i do a specific reverse dns check it makes reference to
> GS> dns1.segfl.ifl.net (an rm dns server) is authorititive.
>
> On which IP address(es) would you like reverse checked?  I
> assumed 62.171.199.74; please indicate if that's correct.
>
> 62.171.199 is handled by dns?.rmplc.co.uk -- and has an
> improperly-formatted SOA record. :-)  Looks like dns0 and dns2
> report NXDOMAIN, and dns1 reports NOERROR.  It also seems like
> the NXDOMAIN-reporting NSes are doing DNS for 62.171.199, but
> dns2 is configured for 62.171.
>
> At any rate, reverse is handled by rmplc.co.uk... so it looks
> like your provider is attempting to do reverse.  It certainly
> hasn't been delegated beyond there.
>
>
> GS> Can someone please put me out of my mysery and confirm or otherwise my
> GS> belief that our isp has still not set things up properly by whatever 
> means
> GS> you use to check dns setup.
>
> Manually following DNS delegations from the root. :-)
>
>
> GS> just to complicate thing this server sits behind a firewall that rm 
> manage.
>
> No big deal... except being behind a firewall can present some
> security hazards if done improperly.
>
>
> Eddy
> --
> Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. - EverQuick Internet Division
> Bandwidth, consulting, e-commerce, hosting, and network building
> Phone: +1 (785) 865-5885 Lawrence and [inter]national
> Phone: +1 (316) 794-8922 Wichita
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 11:23:58 +0000 (GMT)
> From: A Trap <blacklist@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: blacklist@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Please ignore this portion of my mail signature.
>
> These last few lines are a trap for address-harvesting spambots.
> Do NOT send mail to <blacklist@xxxxxxxxx>, or you are likely to
> be blocked.
>
> _____________________________________
> cobalt-users mailing list
> cobalt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe/unsubscribe, or to SEARCH THE ARCHIVES, go to:
> http://list.cobalt.com/mailman/listinfo/cobalt-users


_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail messages direct to your mobile phone http://www.msn.co.uk/mobile