Re: [DNSOP] DNSOP Call for Adoption - draft-west-let-localhost-be-localhost

"Peter van Dijk" <peter.van.dijk@powerdns.com> Thu, 14 September 2017 12:03 UTC

Return-Path: <peter.van.dijk@powerdns.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F8EC13301B for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 05:03:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D94rZyPeMbpa for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 05:02:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx2.open-xchange.com (alcatraz.open-xchange.com [87.191.39.187]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E81E132F3F for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 05:02:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mx2.open-xchange.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id EABE46A407; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 14:02:57 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.open-xchange.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A24756A3FA; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 14:02:54 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=mx2.open-xchange.com) by localhost with ESMTP (eXpurgate 4.1.8) (envelope-from <peter.van.dijk@powerdns.com>) id 59ba6fee-034f-7f000001272a-7f0000018a6b-1 for <multiple-recipients>; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 14:02:54 +0200
Received: from open-xchange.com (imap.open-xchange.com [10.20.30.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx2.open-xchange.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 368016A324; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 14:02:54 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by open-xchange.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2ABF23C1993; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 14:02:54 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from open-xchange.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (imap.open-xchange.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JJi_T8KbB8Nd; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 14:02:54 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.0.20] (095-096-086-198.static.chello.nl [95.96.86.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by open-xchange.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 00B7E3C198D; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 14:02:53 +0200 (CEST)
From: "Peter van Dijk" <peter.van.dijk@powerdns.com>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2017 14:03:29 +0200
Message-ID: <E7C2107B-5552-4AC1-8576-949C1471D70B@powerdns.com>
In-Reply-To: <20170913163355.1038.qmail@ary.lan>
References: <20170913163355.1038.qmail@ary.lan>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.7r5412)
X-purgate-ID: 151428::1505390574-0000034F-3B0613B8/0/0
X-purgate-type: clean
X-purgate-size: 782
X-purgate-Ad: Categorized by eleven eXpurgate (R) http://www.eleven.de
X-purgate: This mail is considered clean (visit http://www.eleven.de for further information)
X-purgate: clean
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/w0ZOOhYEh7MJ3d5FVEFoX9bsjiE>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] DNSOP Call for Adoption - draft-west-let-localhost-be-localhost
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2017 12:03:01 -0000

Hi John,

On 13 Sep 2017, at 18:33, John Levine wrote:

>> I would settle for SHOULD NOT. Can you elaborate on the debugging?
>
> There is something strange going on with my remote server, and I use
> localhost.mydomain so a little debugging server on my own computer
> can steal state and see whats going on.
>
> On the other hand, I could do this just as well:
>
> gazornplotz.mydomain IN A 127.0.0.1
>
> so never mind.  Still not sure I haven't missed something, though.

But now (with either name) you are exposing users of your server to the 
exact problems described in http://seclists.org/bugtraq/2008/Jan/270. 
Why not use /etc/hosts instead, so you only expose yourself?

Kind regards,
-- 
Peter van Dijk
PowerDNS.COM BV - https://www.powerdns.com/