|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: DNS records for routers
Pete, <passion>Since I do NOT believe in "Security through Obscurity" as effective</passion>, I name every address and publish both A and PTR views of this relationship. This applies to all network-addressable entities. CNAME records may be added to taste. Naming should facilitate maintenance of good network operation. So, it depends on how you like to operate. In addition, most automated IP management systems provide both A and PTR entries without extra work, so it becomes a question of "Why not?" for the A records. Round-robin does not seem (to me) to provide any particular business value. - James R. Cutler, EDS 800 Tower Drive, Troy, MI 48098 1 248 265 7514 [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: Pete Kruckenberg [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 2003-03-01, Saturday 2:05 PM To: [email protected] Subject: DNS records for routers Any passionate opinions about DNS record conventions for routers? Or recommendations? I'm not particularly concerned about device naming conventions (we have that down), I'm more interested in what makes sense for public-viewable DNS names (so I can put those beautiful fully-compliant names where people can see them). Some traces show individual interface names, some just show device names. Any particular reason to go one way or the other for PTR records (doing a single device name for every interface seems easier and less-likely to screw up to me)? What about A records? A matching one per PTR, or just one A per device? Or no A records in the public DNS? Would round-robin A records (an A record for every interface address, all using the same device name) break anything (like performance measurement tools or network management tools)? Thanks. Pete.
|