[msw@redhat.com: [rao@gnu.org: Reverse DNS on gcc.gnu.org broken]]

[msw@redhat.com: [rao@gnu.org: Reverse DNS on gcc.gnu.org broken]]

[Matthew Galgoci]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2159 bytes --]


Hi Folks,

I checked this myself, recursing from the a.root-servers.net machine, 
and indeed, the authoratative name servers for the 209.249.29. netblock 
are not responding with a forward dns entry for 209.249.29.67

I realize that this is a bit of a quandry since sources.redhat.com 
responds for multiple domains, but surely the reverse dns should 
resolve to _something_, right?

Let me know if I need to take further action on this.

Kind regards,

Matthew Galgoci

----- Forwarded message from Mark Klein via RT <sysadmin@gnu.org> -----

Envelope-to: rao@gnu.org
Delivery-date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 21:43:12 -0500
Subject: [gnu.org #15993] Reverse DNS on gcc.gnu.org 
From: "Mark Klein via RT" <sysadmin@gnu.org>
Reply-To: sysadmin@gnu.org
X-RT-Loop-Prevention: gnu.org
RT-Ticket: gnu.org #15993
Managed-by: RT 2.0.14 (http://bestpractical.com/rt/)
RT-Originator: mklein@dis.com
Bcc: 

To Whom it May Concern:

Sometime around the second or third week of December, reverse lookups 
on gcc.gnu.org started failing and continues to this point:

 dig -x 209.249.29.67

; <<>> DiG 9.2.1 <<>> -x 209.249.29.67
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: SERVFAIL, id: 42271
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;67.29.249.209.in-addr.arpa.    IN      PTR

;; Query time: 107 msec
;; SERVER: 64.7.69.254#53(64.7.69.254)
;; WHEN: Sat Jan  4 18:35:33 2003
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 44

As part of our spam blocking strategy, we have sendmail configured to 
reject mail from sites where reverse DNS does not provide a valid 
address. As a result, our email subscriptions to some of the gnu 
lists did not get through until we temporarily disabled this.

Do you plan to make this a permanent "feature" or was it just an 
oversite? Our needing to disable that checking in sendmail has meant 
that our spam receipts have tripled.


Regards,


M.
-- 
Mark Klein
http://www.dis.com
PGP Key Available

-- 

Matthew Galgoci		"Dirty deeds, done dirt cheap"
System Administrator
Red Hat, Inc
919.754.3700 x44155

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]

Re: [msw@redhat.com: [rao@gnu.org: Reverse DNS on gcc.gnu.org broken]]

[Christopher Faylor]

On Mon, Jan 06, 2003 at 10:50:26AM -0500, Matthew Galgoci wrote:
>
>Hi Folks,
>
>I checked this myself, recursing from the a.root-servers.net machine, 
>and indeed, the authoratative name servers for the 209.249.29. netblock 
>are not responding with a forward dns entry for 209.249.29.67
>
>I realize that this is a bit of a quandry since sources.redhat.com 
>responds for multiple domains, but surely the reverse dns should 
>resolve to _something_, right?
>
>Let me know if I need to take further action on this.

You should communicate with Nate Golink on this.  He was tracking this
problem down last week and I sent him pertinent email from above.net.

cgf

Re: [msw@redhat.com: [rao@gnu.org: Reverse DNS on gcc.gnu.org broken]]

[Gerald Pfeifer]

On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> You should communicate with Nate Golink on this.  He was tracking this
> problem down last week and I sent him pertinent email from above.net.

I noticed this has been fixed now, thanks!

Gerald

PS: admin@dbai, you can now remove the exception for 209.249.29.67 in
our sendmail config.
-- 
Gerald Pfeifer (Jerry)   gerald@pfeifer.com   http://www.pfeifer.com/gerald/