|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: ingress filtering
-----Original Message----- From: Eric Germann [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, May 29, 1998 8:09 AM To: John Fraizer Cc: Mr. Dana Hudes; [email protected] Subject: Re: ingress filtering At 02:32 PM 5/28/98 -0400, John Fraizer wrote: > Actually it has nothing to do with WINS. If all the ISP's would implement Bzzt. Thank you for playing, though. If it were not for WinS, there wouldn't be a second packet being sent, no matter what junk is the payload. >solid in-addr.arpa reverse mappings, this would go away. Microsoft's DNS >resolver has been extended, when DNS lookups fail, to do a reverse NETBIOS >query against the target machine so it can use its name when displaying >stuff via NBTSTAT, etc. It was designed this way, before the Internet >became popular. Excuse me? I was using the Internet way before Microshaft was a dream in Bill's head. The RFC's you quote were rammed into existance by DARPA to provide early ecanpsulation techniques so that companies like MS could say they were IP/Internet compatible, (instead of using a real protocol) and get away from Novel slamming them for non-routable protocol support only. All they did was to take the same non-routable junk and throw it inside an ip packet and call it "internet" compatible. The RFC's quoted provide a way to make that encapsulation work, they do not recommend conversion to that as a standard. To encourage that kind of conversion would be a major leap backwards. (Wow! let's all abandon our routeable protocols and use a non-routed local segment only, encapsulated protocol. Yippee!) Now I agree ISP's should do better DNS resolution, but every MS box plugged into the net sending a second packet adds up to a lot of junk packets eating up expensive bandwidth. MS catches the blunt of the critisizm because they are the only ones to have adopted such a lame networking scheme, and then forced it down others quotes. >Before we all rant at MS, I suggest we all read RFC's 1001 and 1002 and >UNDERSTAND NetBIOS over IP, before we blame ALL the worlds ills on MS. >Last I knew, they weren't written by MS. > > >RFC 1001-> http://answerpointe.cctec.com/notes/rfcs1/254e_1e2.htm > >RFC 1002-> http://answerpointe.cctec.com/notes/rfcs1/2e46_1e2.htm > >Author(s): Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, End-to-End Services >Task Force, Internet Activities Board, NetBIOS Working Group > >>------- >>John Fraizer (root) | __ _ | >>The System Administrator | / / (_)__ __ ____ __ | The choice >>mailto:[email protected] | / /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / | of a GNU >>http://www.EnterZone.Net/ | /____/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ | Generation >> A 486 is a terrible thing to waste... >> > >======================================================================= ====== >Eric Germann Computer and Communications Technologies >[email protected] Van Wert, OH 45891 > Phone: 419 968 2640 > >http://www.cctec.com Fax: 419 968 2641 >Network Design, Connectivity & System Integration Services >A Microsoft Solution Provider >
|