Dear Peter Pentchev, A way to delegate reverse resolution for network less than /24 is defined in RFC 2317. And it's different from one used. But you're right: the problem is probably not in unresolvable PTR. The problem is in unresolvable CNAME instead of PTR, so PTR is never found at all. And yes: it may affect different applications where gethostbyname() is used. I will test gethostbyname() behavior for this case in Windows and Unix and report back. --Thursday, May 29, 2003, 11:26:04 AM, you wrote to 3APA3Aat_private: PP> On Wed, May 28, 2003 at 02:45:25PM +0400, 3APA3A wrote: >> Dear Davide Del Vecchio, >> >> Currently 210.193.16.25 doesn't resolve. But during original test it had >> flowed PTR record: >> >> bash-2.03$ host 210.193.16.25 >> 25.16.193.210.IN-ADDR.ARPA is a nickname for 25.16.16.193.210.IN-ADDR.ARPA >> >> (.16 is twice) PP> This is not necessarily a flawed record; I believe it might be as simple PP> as the ultimate in classless reverse DNS delegation. Note that the PP> 16.193.210.in-addr.arpa zone is delegated to ns[12].qala.com.sg, while PP> this specific "alias" subdelegates the reverse DNS records for PP> 210.193.16.25 to dns[12].lga.net.sg. PP> G'luck, PP> Peter -- ~/ZARAZA Ибо факты есть факты, и изложены они лишь для того, чтобы их поняли и в них поверили. (Твен)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri May 30 2003 - 13:51:53 PDT