[dns-operations] Karl Auerbach on adding 'millions' more TLD - what do folks think about the operational impact?
Mark_Andrews at isc.org
Tue Jan 9 22:46:03 UTC 2007
> * Lutz Donnerhacke wrote:
> > * Mark Andrews wrote:
> >> All vendors should be supporting DNAME by now. It's only been
> >> around 7 years (August 1999) on standards track.
> > Microsoft does not. The hotfix for WinXP DNAME errors is to disable DNAME
> > handling.
> To make it a bit more clear: Microsoft DNS-code can't serve DNAMEs and also
> can't resolve DNAMEs at all. Since DNAME processing was enabled in W2KSP2,
> the DNS parser fails on every DNAME record and discards the whole packet.
> That's why DNAMEs can't be resolved at all in W2K and WXP enviroments.
> There is a hotfix for Microsoft DNS: The DNAME code is changed to an value
> in the experimental range and the parser did not recognise the records
> In short: Using DNAME in your zone ensures that your names are unreachable
> in networks running Microsoft DNS (the vast majority of companies).
It sounds like Microsoft did what we would want them to do
here. They implement DNAME (which is what we want all
vendors to do). They realised they had a bug and issues a
short term work-around.
I suspect that they will issue a complete fix in due course.
I see this as have no real impact on using DNAMEs. The fix
is available and those that want to resolve those name will
get the fix. DNAMEs just generate CNAMEs so the sites are
on the air. If you have a Microsoft DNS server and you
want to serve DNAMEs you can either ask Microsoft for a fix
or use a alternate vendor.
> dns-operations mailing list
> dns-operations at lists.oarci.net
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews at isc.org
More information about the dns-operations