[63163] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Annoying dynamic DNS updates (was Re: someone from attbi please
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Mon Sep 29 12:25:34 2003
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 09:24:16 -0700
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
To: Tim Yocum <tim@yocum.org>, Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20030927235607.GD22022@yocum.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
I think the solution is for those DNS operators affected who have not
signed an EULA for the system that is hammering their DNS to sue Micr0$0ft
for the costs incurred in dealing with the issue. Making Micr0$0ft
play legal whack-a-mole may be the only strategy with a chance of success
here.
(I recommend small claims so that worst case, your down side is minimal).
Owen
--On Saturday, September 27, 2003 6:56 PM -0500 Tim Yocum <tim@yocum.org>
wrote:
>
> In previous mail, Sean Donelan said:
>> Are you talking about the kitchen sink protocol called DNS, or trying
>> to contact another ISP, or the sociological difficulties of educating
>> the general public how to configure very complicated "personal" computers
>> and software without making a mistake?
>
> Unfortunately, telling end users to disable a default setting is
> rather difficult these days. It's too bad that Microsoft hasn't
> addressed this issue in the past several years that it has been
> an enabled-by-default option.
>
>> Why is dynamic DNS update enabled by default on some operating systems?
>
> Back in beta days, the official explanation given was that the DNS
> updating was a "value add" and that it would never be disabled as
> a default as a courtesy to corporate customers. Furthermore, MSFT
> folks have repeatedly said that the workaround is to simply configure
> your nameserver to silently ignore the error logs.
>
> Neat policy, eh? I would assume that the dynamic updating feature
> is something easily toggled via a registry script; larger ISPs ought
> to include this "fix" as an option with their installation CDs. Alas,
> we get back to the ongoing debate: adjust user prefs for them, for
> their own good... or get the vendor to cooperate?
>
> - Tim
