[24810] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: in-addr.arpa question
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ehud Gavron)
Wed Aug 11 05:29:24 1999
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 02:25:09 -0700 (MST)
From: Ehud Gavron <GAVRON@ACES.COM>
In-reply-to: "Your message dated Wed, 11 Aug 1999 10:32:09 +0200"
<3.0.5.32.19990811103209.007c7990@max.ibm.net.il>
To: Hank Nussbacher <hank@ibm.net.il>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu, GAVRON@ACES.COM
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
>I have a client who is now peering with BBN. BBN supplied a /30 as follows:
>207.112.240.113 is their side via a company they purchased called Nap.Net.
>The DNS shows: NChicago2-core0.nap.net
>Thats ok. The other side is the customer colo router and the IP of
>207.112.240.114 shows: chi2-vts.ianet.net
>Now I claim that the domain ianet.net (based on Internic data) is some
>company in WV and has nothing to do with us (ianet is the customer name we
>were assigned by BBN). BBN claims that is this their "standard naming
>convention" for assigning customer interface names.
BBN is confused.
They should change it to a moniker that is acceptable to the customer.
^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If ianet.net is taken by someone other than the customer,
they have an obligation (sorry, not RFC mandated) to represent
it correctly.
I could go on, but why. BBN still thinks they invented tcp/ip.
Ehud
>Traceroutes will show up with ianet.net in the path. I claim this is in
>violation of some RFC. Am I wrong? There may be many such PTR records
>within BBN for "customername.net".
>Thanks,
>Hank
