[122556] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: History of 4.2.2.2. What's the story?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Patrick W. Gilmore)
Tue Feb 16 22:34:08 2010
From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
In-Reply-To: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAuAAAAAAAAAKTyXRN5/+lGvU59a+P7CFMBAN6gY+ZG84BMpVQcAbDh1IQAAAATbSgAABAAAADT0eC+Ss13TLme8r+R6s5VAQAAAAA=@iname.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 22:33:27 -0500
To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Feb 16, 2010, at 10:24 PM, Frank Bulk wrote:
> We do. It's at our upstream provider, just in case we had an upstream
> connectivity issue or some internal meltdown that prevented those in =
the
> outside world to hit our (authoritative) DNS servers. Of course, =
that's
> most helpful for DNS records that resolve to IPs *outside* our =
network.=20
What you describe - authorities used by people off your network to =
resolve A records with IP addresses outside your network - is not what =
Joe was describing. What the recursive name server your end users =
queried to resolve names, the IP address in their desktop's control =
panel, outside your network?
I can see a small ISP using its upstream's recursive name server. But =
to the rest of the world, most small ISPs look like a part of their =
upstream's network.
--=20
TTFN,
patrick
> =3D=3D=3D
> <snip>
>=20
> For what it's worth, I have never heard of an ISP, big or small, =20
> deciding to place resolvers used by their customers in someone else's =20=
> network. Perhaps I just need to get out more.
>=20
> Joe
>=20
>=20
>=20
