How about allocating some "good sounding" IP addresses for them,
(like 1.0.0.x/32) and hard-wiring them into resolver code? Would
save quite a lot of configuration headaches for newbies.
Hardwiring anything like this into a system like DNS sounds like a really
bad idea if only for the simple reason that DNS is not just used on the
Internet, but also within private networks. Having hardwiring IP numbers in
this case would cause headaches of unimaginable proportions.
Nick
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 22:02:04 +0100 (BST)
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@eunet.ie>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Cc: namedroppers@internic.net
Subject: Re: The SWAMP
Resent-Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 17:12:00 -0400 (EDT)
Resent-From: randy@internic.net (Randy Bush)
Resent-To: namedroppers <namedroppers@internic.net>> How about allocating some "good sounding" IP addresses for them,
> (like 1.0.0.x/32) and hard-wiring them into resolver code? Would
> save quite a lot of configuration headaches for newbies.Hardwiring anything like this into a system like DNS sounds like a really
bad idea if only for the simple reason that DNS is not just used on the
Internet, but also within private networks. Having hardwiring IP numbers in
this case would cause headaches of unimaginable proportions.
I'm ambivalent on this. I think hardwiring the addresses is a good thing,
but a configuration flag should be provided to override the hardwired addresses
(this may simply be the existance of a 'cache' statement, or something
more explicit).
The real problem will be in re-education (or rather educating) all those DNS
admins out there who don't even know they are DNS admin 
regards
Nick
Mathias Koerber | Tel: +65 / 471 9820 | mathias@staff.singnet.com.sg
SingNet NOC | Fax: +65 / 475 3273 | mathias@koerber.org
Q'town Tel. Exch. | PGP: Keyid: 768/25E082BD, finger mathias@singnet.com.sg
2 Stirling Rd | 1A 8B FC D4 93 F1 9A FC BD 98 A3 1A 0E 73 01 65
S'pore 148943 | Disclaimer: I speak only for myself
* Eifersucht ist eine Leidenschaft, die mit Eifer sucht, was Leiden schafft *