A list of (mostly) technical consequences of TLD wildcards

Mailman List Mirror (Read Only)
1

I've been collecting a list of things that are broken, or might break,
now that the two most populated TLDs have A and MX record wildcards.

You can find the list at http://www.packet-pushers.net/tld-wildcards/

I'll be happy to receive any additions or corrections that you might
have.

Duane W.

2

Makes me wonder why Verisign didn't use a (less harmful?) CNAME
wildcard ...

Rik

3

Makes me wonder why Verisign didn't use a (less harmful?) CNAME wildcard ...

The CNAME algorythm in RFC1034 looks for CNAMEs before it looks for wildcards,
meaning that the target of a CNAME could end up matching a wildcard, but the
CNAME owner itself won't be found using the wildcarding rules. see [4.3.2].

What this means is, there is no such thing as a wildcard CNAME.

4

Funny...

$ host -t cname \*.TD
*.TD is an alias for www.nic.TD.

Rik

5

> What this means is, there is no such thing as a wildcard CNAME.

Funny...

$ host -t cname \*.TD
*.TD is an alias for www.nic.TD.

just because bind does it doesn't make it a standard.