Re: [Asrg] DNS basics, was overloading server names doesn't work
"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Tue, 09 February 2010 17:10 UTC
Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Original-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FACA3A74A3 for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 09:10:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.698
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.501, BAYES_00=-2.599, HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI=-4.3, RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED=-4.3]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FXdjc31bl4uO for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 09:10:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (l053.n.taugh.com [64.57.183.53]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C966D3A73B3 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 09:10:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 2113 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2010 17:11:37 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent:cleverness; s=k1002; bh=gNY2yDSl3xlhkJWjX1I6LU9D7pRDdxyJ9k7+YFzuyGs=; b=m7tz+3qCf5gyiH5rYchK9y9oQfeqw0ZuuPeqrUEyK6yti/Ybrg1arKm6q6Fb/FIehNk2hT2LBNom1pxhVXvn3/Qw97Lha/fJwNkL/6CNJmVHr/6l6d68VPN2RNKKMhW3297/ztvVsWCT5eTWPCNkVxB5zW507i5tcUpscDG/TFk=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent:cleverness; s=k1002; bh=gNY2yDSl3xlhkJWjX1I6LU9D7pRDdxyJ9k7+YFzuyGs=; b=HCQ5wl7tG4dBQ9kyXXmPtbzY2UHoUyKJpfj2UtK/Rjnt3hGldDGy2kjOvM1FFkZpVFDlQn/zZAC+O8NqbE4ZY2ZmsJERC4oC4+JgsiTnvbgj53D4YR7wQnhurIV4AJtY2cyqU8bJ2KQB0COyncwYNLOK0zYSgxCTxK6iJLGJd0w=
Received: (ofmipd 208.31.42.62) with (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 9 Feb 2010 17:11:15 -0000
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 12:11:36 -0500
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1002091154380.5333@simone.lan>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: Dave CROCKER <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
In-Reply-To: <4B719287.1000708@bbiw.net>
References: <20100209012039.98092.qmail@simone.iecc.com> <4B70BCCB.5020405@dcrocker.net> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1002082110250.10191@simone.lan> <4B717F89.9060901@dcrocker.net> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1002091121080.5333@simone.lan> <4B719287.1000708@bbiw.net>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
Cleverness: None detected
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Cc: Anti Spam Research Group <asrg@irtf.org>
Subject: Re: [Asrg] DNS basics, was overloading server names doesn't work
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 17:10:33 -0000
>>>>>> mail.btinternet.com. 600 IN CNAME pop-smtp.bt.mail.yahoo.com. >>>>>> pop-smtp.bt.mail.yahoo.com. 1800 IN CNAME >>>>>> pop-smtp.bt.mail.fy5.b.yahoo.com. >>>>>> pop-smtp.bt.mail.fy5.b.yahoo.com. 300 IN A 217.12.13.134 >>>>>> pop-smtp.bt.mail.fy5.b.yahoo.com. 300 IN A 217.146.188.192 >>>>> _report.pop-smtp.bt.mail.fy5.b.yahoo.com IN TXT abuse-report@yahoo.com >>>> >>>> Nope, that won't work. CNAMEs don't do a partial match. > Where did I or anyone else specify a partial match? The user thinks his POP server is called mail.btinternet.com. When he looks up _report.mail.btinternet.com, what do you expect to happen? >> Also 2181. I'll go see if there's a clearer explanation somewhere else. > > Normally, something finer-grained that a reference to all of 15 pages would > be expected. Aw, come on. If you can't find the part about CNAMEs in 10 seconds, you're not trying. Regards, John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY "I dropped the toothpaste", said Tom, crestfallenly.
- [Asrg] Iteration #3. Chris Lewis
- Re: [Asrg] Iteration #3. Dave CROCKER
- Re: [Asrg] Iteration #3. Steve Atkins
- Re: [Asrg] Iteration #3. Chris Lewis
- Re: [Asrg] Iteration #3. Derek Diget
- Re: [Asrg] Iteration #3. Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [Asrg] Iteration #3. Chris Lewis
- Re: [Asrg] Iteration #3. Chris Lewis
- [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via posting (w… Dave CROCKER
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… Lyndon Nerenberg (VE6BBM/VE7TFX)
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… Chris Lewis
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… Steve Atkins
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… Dave CROCKER
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… Dotzero
- Re: [Asrg] Iteration #3. Derek Diget
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… Derek Diget
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… Bart Schaefer
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [Asrg] Iteration #3. Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [Asrg] Iteration #3. Daniel Feenberg
- Re: [Asrg] Iteration #3. John Levine
- Re: [Asrg] Iteration #3. Daniel Feenberg
- Re: [Asrg] Iteration #3. Dave CROCKER
- Re: [Asrg] Iteration #3. John Levine
- Re: [Asrg] Iteration #3. Dave CROCKER
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… Ian Eiloart
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… John Levine
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… BOBOTEK, ALEX (ATTCINW)
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… Andrew Richards
- [Asrg] who has the message (was Re: Consensus Cal… Dave CROCKER
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… Chris Lewis
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… Andrew Richards
- Re: [Asrg] who has the message (was Re: Consensus… Andrew Richards
- Re: [Asrg] who has the message (was Re: Consensus… Dave CROCKER
- Re: [Asrg] who has the message (was Re: Consensus… Chris Lewis
- Re: [Asrg] who has the message (was Re: Consensus… John Levine
- Re: [Asrg] who has the message (was Re: Consensus… Dave CROCKER
- Re: [Asrg] overloading server names doesn't work,… John R Levine
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… Bill Cole
- Re: [Asrg] overloading server names doesn't work,… Daniel Feenberg
- Re: [Asrg] who has the message (was Re: Consensus… Ian Eiloart
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… Ian Eiloart
- Re: [Asrg] who has the message (was Re: Consensus… Ian Eiloart
- Re: [Asrg] who has the message (was Re: Consensus… Andrew Richards
- Re: [Asrg] who has the message (was Re: Consensus… Andrew Richards
- Re: [Asrg] who has the message (was Re: Consensus… Ian Eiloart
- Re: [Asrg] who has the message (was Re: Consensus… Andrew Richards
- Re: [Asrg] who has the message (was Re: Consensus… Ian Eiloart
- Re: [Asrg] overloading server names doesn't work,… Dave CROCKER
- Re: [Asrg] who has the message (was Re: Consensus… Paul Russell
- Re: [Asrg] overloading server names doesn't work,… John R Levine
- Re: [Asrg] overloading server names doesn't work,… Dave CROCKER
- Re: [Asrg] DNS basics, was overloading server nam… John R Levine
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… Andrew Richards
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… Ian Eiloart
- Re: [Asrg] DNS basics, was overloading server nam… Dave CROCKER
- Re: [Asrg] DNS basics, was overloading server nam… John R Levine
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… Jose-Marcio Martins da Cruz
- Re: [Asrg] DNS basics, was overloading server nam… Douglas Otis
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… Ian Eiloart
- Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via postin… Jose-Marcio Martins da Cruz