[69748] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Anyone from AT&T here? (AT&T bogus DNSBL answers)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Mon Apr 19 16:05:31 2004
To: just me <matt@snark.net>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 19 Apr 2004 12:45:19 PDT."
<Pine.GSO.4.33L0.0404191244310.1077-100000@pants.snark.net>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 16:04:54 -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
--==_Exmh_-1785972056P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 12:45:19 PDT, just me said:
>
> On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 Michael.Dillon@radianz.com wrote:
>
> After all, people who build DNS infrastructure intend it to be
> used to for generic DNS translations, not generic database
> lookups.
>
> Wait. What's the difference? I must have missed something.
LDAP is on port 389. ;)
DNS is intended for "give me the A record for the hostname FOO".
LDAP is a more proper tool for "Give me the list of hosts that user
Q-Froob is allowed to post mail from on Tuesdays after 5PM".
Unfortunately, some of the anti-spam proposals look more like the
latter than the former....
--==_Exmh_-1785972056P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001
iD8DBQFAhDDlcC3lWbTT17ARAjOYAKC24lI0PmXy943BTB/3PcNWj0yTsACg9P4I
FXnmkgTN/vSwmx8u6EdUvKg=
=mlff
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_-1785972056P--
