Re: [Full-disclosure] Reverse dns

From: Ben McGinnes (ben_at_adversary.org)
Date: 03/12/05

  • Next message: bipin gautam: "RE: [Full-disclosure] Re: Multiple AV Vendor Incorrect CRC32 BypassVulnerability." 
    Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 12:30:40 +1100
To: Paul Schmehl <pauls@utdallas.edu>

    Paul Schmehl(pauls@utdallas.edu)@Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 09:57:57AM -0600:
    > Is there an RFC *requirement* for reverse dns?

    This doesn't overtly state a requirement for reverse DNS, but the
    existence of BCP 20 (aka RFC 2317) indicates the assumption of reverse
    DNS as being standard. This document describes how to configure
    classless reverse DNS records. You could consider it as
    circumstantial evidence in favour.

    Regards,
    Ben

    _______________________________________________
    Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
    Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
    Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://www.secunia.com/

  • Next message: bipin gautam: "RE: [Full-disclosure] Re: Multiple AV Vendor Incorrect CRC32 BypassVulnerability."
    • Quantcast