[20619] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: WARNING: AOL is hosed (again)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (CyberTech/CTCS%CTCS@ctcs.net)
Mon Oct 19 11:28:45 1998
From: CyberTech/CTCS%CTCS@ctcs.net
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:47:33 -0700
To: nanog@merit.edu
Just FYI.. I have personally NAK'd 4 updates sent in by clients of mine
which effected domains on my servers. The updates were technically
correct (for auto-processing), but had the wrong information. internic
conveniently ignored the NAK's, all of them.
Phillip Vandry <vandry@Mlink.NET>@merit.edu on 10/16/98 09:37:59 AM
Sent by: owner-nanog@merit.edu
To: jamie@ais.net
cc: markb@infi.net, nanog@merit.edu (bcc: CyberTech/CTCS)
Subject: Re: WARNING: AOL is hosed (again)
> > If yes to my second question, then the tracking numbers either need to
be
> > made much longer and randomized or a one time pass phrase (session
key)
> > needs to be added to the acknowlegement form.
>
> You can actually set a domain name so that it cannot be changed, by
> any template, by any modification, correct guardian or NOT.
Sounds like a nonreversible setting to me. What if you need to change it?
Anyway, I think that by default, the update goes through automatically,
a positive acknoledgement is ignored (default behaviour) and a negative
acknowledgement is honored. (Which means AOL should have been able to
stop it).
Then there is the setting where the update will not go through by default,
and a positive acknowledgement is required.
As to whether it all works as advertized (and PGP auth too?), who knows?
-Phil
