IP address or DNS name (bug or feature)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
83 messages Options
12345
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

IP address or DNS name (bug or feature)

Walter H.
Hello,

as this is the first time I'm using Fedora, I noticed the following ...

(a) when open a SSH connection, it tells e.g.
Last login: Mon Jun  5 20:14:37 2017 from 192.168.1.1
all other Linux VMs and/or the Router box show there
Last login: Sat Jun  3 21:41:45 2017 from winpc.local

(b) when configuring Firefox using a proxy, this works only
when entering a IP address; when entering a DNS name
a 'Proxy server not found' error is the result ...

(c) when configuring a line printer I had to enter e.g. this
lpd://192.168.1.11/CP1515N
when entering a DNS name e.g. printer.local
then this result in a 'printer.local' could not be found;

a nslookup shows the correct IP addresses
this means the DNS server is working properly ...

Thanks for explanations,
Walter



_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]

smime.p7s (4K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: IP address or DNS name (bug or feature)

Samuel Sieb
On 06/05/2017 11:25 AM, Walter H. wrote:

> as this is the first time I'm using Fedora, I noticed the following ...
>
> (a) when open a SSH connection, it tells e.g.
> Last login: Mon Jun  5 20:14:37 2017 from 192.168.1.1
> all other Linux VMs and/or the Router box show there
> Last login: Sat Jun  3 21:41:45 2017 from winpc.local
>
> (b) when configuring Firefox using a proxy, this works only
> when entering a IP address; when entering a DNS name
> a 'Proxy server not found' error is the result ...
>
> (c) when configuring a line printer I had to enter e.g. this
> lpd://192.168.1.11/CP1515N
> when entering a DNS name e.g. printer.local
> then this result in a 'printer.local' could not be found;
>
> a nslookup shows the correct IP addresses
> this means the DNS server is working properly ...
>
nslookup resolved the .local addresses?  That's surprising and might be
a problem.

For at least a and c, make sure you have nss-mdns installed.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: IP address or DNS name (bug or feature)

Walter H.
On 05.06.2017 20:38, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> nslookup resolved the .local addresses?  That's surprising and might
> be a problem.
I'm using inside my network a .local domain which is defined in a ZONE
on my DNS - so no problem ...



_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]

smime.p7s (4K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: IP address or DNS name (bug or feature)

Samuel Sieb
On 06/05/2017 11:44 AM, Walter H. wrote:
> On 05.06.2017 20:38, Samuel Sieb wrote:
>> nslookup resolved the .local addresses?  That's surprising and might
>> be a problem.
> I'm using inside my network a .local domain which is defined in a ZONE
> on my DNS - so no problem ...
>
Actually, that *IS* a problem.  You should not be doing that.  That is
quite likely the source of all your problems.  That domain name is
reserved for a specific purpose and putting it in DNS will cause conflicts.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: IP address or DNS name (bug or feature)

Gordon Messmer-2
On 06/05/2017 01:25 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:

> On 06/05/2017 11:44 AM, Walter H. wrote:
>> On 05.06.2017 20:38, Samuel Sieb wrote:
>>> nslookup resolved the .local addresses? That's surprising and might
>>> be a problem.
>> I'm using inside my network a .local domain which is defined in a
>> ZONE on my DNS - so no problem ...
> Actually, that *IS* a problem.  You should not be doing that. That is
> quite likely the source of all your problems.  That domain name is
> reserved for a specific purpose and putting it in DNS will cause
> conflicts.

Sounds likely.  In this case, you probably want to *remove* nss-mdns,
and if that doesn't solve the problem, maybe also remove "mdns4_minimal
[NOTFOUND=return]" from /etc/nsswitch.conf's "hosts:" line.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: IP address or DNS name (bug or feature)

Walter H.
In reply to this post by Samuel Sieb
On Mon, June 5, 2017 22:25, Samuel Sieb wrote:

> On 06/05/2017 11:44 AM, Walter H. wrote:
>> On 05.06.2017 20:38, Samuel Sieb wrote:
>>> nslookup resolved the .local addresses?  That's surprising and might
>>> be a problem.
>> I'm using inside my network a .local domain which is defined in a ZONE
>> on my DNS - so no problem ...
>>
> Actually, that *IS* a problem.  You should not be doing that.  That is
> quite likely the source of all your problems.  That domain name is
> reserved for a specific purpose and putting it in DNS will cause
> conflicts.

Sorry, you're telling *BULLSHIT*; the TLD .local is exactly reserved for
this purpose ...

_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: IP address or DNS name (bug or feature)

Samuel Sieb
On 06/05/2017 09:13 PM, Walter H. wrote:

> On Mon, June 5, 2017 22:25, Samuel Sieb wrote:
>> On 06/05/2017 11:44 AM, Walter H. wrote:
>>> On 05.06.2017 20:38, Samuel Sieb wrote:
>>>> nslookup resolved the .local addresses?  That's surprising and might
>>>> be a problem.
>>> I'm using inside my network a .local domain which is defined in a ZONE
>>> on my DNS - so no problem ...
>>>
>> Actually, that *IS* a problem.  You should not be doing that.  That is
>> quite likely the source of all your problems.  That domain name is
>> reserved for a specific purpose and putting it in DNS will cause
>> conflicts.
>
> Sorry, you're telling *BULLSHIT*; the TLD .local is exactly reserved for
> this purpose ...
>
It is not!  Try reading this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.local

Microsoft at one point suggested using it, but they have since recanted.

According to https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6762 .local is reserved for
MDNS use and is not supposed to be DNS resolvable.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: IP address or DNS name (bug or feature)

Gordon Messmer-2
In reply to this post by Walter H.
On 06/05/2017 09:13 PM, Walter H. wrote:
>> Actually, that*IS*  a problem.  You should not be doing that.  That is
>> quite likely the source of all your problems.  That domain name is
>> reserved for a specific purpose and putting it in DNS will cause
>> conflicts.
> Sorry, you're telling*BULLSHIT*; the TLD .local is exactly reserved for
> this purpose ...


Actually, .local is reserved by RFC 6762 for resolution via multicast DNS:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.local

OP is using that domain in standard DNS, in violation of relevant standards.

RFC 2606 reserves .test, .example, .invalid, and .localhost, none of
which are recommended for use in private networks.  RFC 7686 reserves
.onion for Tor hidden services.  As far as I know, there are no TLDs
reserved for private networks.  All users should use properly registered
domains for all DNS zones, private and public.

_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: IP address or DNS name (bug or feature)

Mike Wright
In reply to this post by Walter H.
On 06/05/2017 09:13 PM, Walter H. wrote:

> On Mon, June 5, 2017 22:25, Samuel Sieb wrote:
>> On 06/05/2017 11:44 AM, Walter H. wrote:
>>> On 05.06.2017 20:38, Samuel Sieb wrote:
>>>> nslookup resolved the .local addresses?  That's surprising and might
>>>> be a problem.
>>> I'm using inside my network a .local domain which is defined in a ZONE
>>> on my DNS - so no problem ...
>>>
>> Actually, that *IS* a problem.  You should not be doing that.  That is
>> quite likely the source of all your problems.  That domain name is
>> reserved for a specific purpose and putting it in DNS will cause
>> conflicts.
>
> Sorry, you're telling *BULLSHIT*; the TLD .local is exactly reserved for
> this purpose ...

While that may have been the original intent Apple's Bonjour (mDNS)
decided to glom onto that tld, rendering its use problematic.  Here's a
snippet from Wikipedia's entry on Multicast DNS:

"By default, mDNS only and exclusively resolves host names ending with
the .local top-level domain (TLD). This can cause problems if that
domain includes hosts which do not implement mDNS but which can be found
via a conventional unicast DNS server. Resolving such conflicts requires
network-configuration changes that violate the zero-configuration goal."

_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: IP address or DNS name (bug or feature)

Walter H.
In reply to this post by Samuel Sieb
On Tue, June 6, 2017 06:29, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> According to https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6762 .local is reserved for
> MDNS use and is not supposed to be DNS resolvable.

exact this RFC says in "Appendix G. Private DNS Namespaces"

"We do not recommend use of unregistered top-level
domains at all, but should network operators decide to do this, the
following top-level domains have been used on private internal
networks without the problems caused by trying to reuse ".local."for
this purpose:

.intranet.
.internal.
.private.
.corp.
.home.
.lan."

and the TLD .home. is just in a pre-registration phase ...

tell me a TLD I can use instead, and which meets the following 3 criterias:

(1) it will never been used officially
(2) it is not .test., .corp.
(3) it is shorter that 5 characters (4 or less)

Thanks,
Walter

p.s. in case the phenomenas of the OP won't change these are true bugs.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: IP address or DNS name (bug or feature)

Samuel Sieb
On 06/05/2017 10:19 PM, Walter H. wrote:

> .intranet.
> .internal.
> .private.
> .corp.
> .home.
> .lan."
>
> and the TLD .home. is just in a pre-registration phase ...
>
> tell me a TLD I can use instead, and which meets the following 3 criterias:
>
> (1) it will never been used officially
> (2) it is not .test., .corp.
> (3) it is shorter that 5 characters (4 or less)
>
.lan meets your requirements and I have seen that used.  Or you could
make up something random.  Since it's just your private network, if the
one you choose gets used later, you will have to change it again, but
you'll have lots of warning.

> p.s. in case the phenomenas of the OP won't change these are true bugs.

I don't understand what you're saying here.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: IP address or DNS name (bug or feature)

Walter H.
On Tue, June 6, 2017 07:40, Samuel Sieb wrote:

> On 06/05/2017 10:19 PM, Walter H. wrote:
>> .intranet.
>> .internal.
>> .private.
>> .corp.
>> .home.
>> .lan."
>>
>> and the TLD .home. is just in a pre-registration phase ...
>>
>> tell me a TLD I can use instead, and which meets the following 3
>> criterias:
>>
>> (1) it will never been used officially
>> (2) it is not .test., .corp.
>> (3) it is shorter that 5 characters (4 or less)
>>
> .lan meets your requirements and I have seen that used.

I had .home., but when I noticed that the pre-registration of .home.
has started, I changed this to .local.;
at work we have company.local.
> Or you could make up something random.
> Since it's just your private network,
.local as something random :D
> if the one you choose gets used later,
> you will have to change it again, but
> you'll have lots of warning.

>> p.s. in case the phenomenas of the OP won't change these are true bugs.
>
> I don't understand what you're saying here.

the system/Firefox has to take e.g.   proxy.my.lan  as proxy server ...
also the printer must work with e.g.   lpd://printer.my.lan/CP1515N ...
and not just with the IP address ...
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: IP address or DNS name (bug or feature)

Tim-163
In reply to this post by Walter H.
Allegedly, on or about 05 June 2017, Walter H. sent:
> I'm using inside my network a .local domain which is defined in a ZONE
> on my DNS - so no problem ...

If somewhere on your LAN are things using ZeroConf, Bonjour, or other
similar autonomous psuedo-DNS software (client or server), then
using .local for your own DNS records will probably cause problems.
Those things (ZeroConf et al), expect to have control of it all by
themselves, and get their knickers in a twist if you get involved.

And, not only that, they do their name resolutions using a different
system, on a different port number.  So, printer software, for example,
trying to work out where laserjet.local can be found, is unlikely to
consult your regular DNS server on port 53.  And the converse is true,
as I found out, with my printer that wanted to self-configure using
the .local scheme, and only the .local scheme.  I have a fully working
traditional DNS, but no multicast DNS (ZeroConf, Bonjour, etc).  The
printer got nowhere with it's self-misconfiguration routines.

If you had a purely old-school DNS setup, you can almost get away with
using any name that isn't in use by anything else (my problem with an
annoying Pixma printer proved that, even then, it's a problem, as you
add new hardware).  In the past, there was a list of suggested top-level
domains, for LANs, that included .local.  But, since then, at least one
of those autonomous systems began using .local for themselves.

There is one virtually guaranteed way to manage your own DNS without any
conflicts, and that's to register a domain name.  It's yours, you can do
what you like with it, and other people are prevented from making public
use of it (something that would cause you problems).  You don't even
have to use it with a website, or other public service.  But if you do
use it on the WWW, then you can make a subdomain for your LAN, to
separate the two without managerial headaches.

If you don't want to go down that route, then choose one of the other
(current) recommendations.  And be prepare to keep an eye out for
changes to that list of recommendations.

Supposedly, these auto-config DNS-like systems should make things
simpler for you.  You'd simply call your computer a name, put a name
into your printer, likewise with your router (though many devices come
preconfigured with their own names), and the auto-config networking will
handle all the behind-the-scenes name resolution without you having to
do a thing.  Mind you, it's like that plug-and-play debacle, where you
have to trust everything on your LAN, and anything plugged in is
implicitly allowed to do whatever it wants to.  That might be okay for
basic home LANs, but not so for offices where random dopey employees may
plug in random un-authorised devices.

--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -rsvp
Linux 3.9.10-100.fc17.x86_64 #1 SMP Sun Jul 14 01:31:27 UTC 2013 x86_64
(always current details of the computer that I'm writing this email on)

Boilerplate:  All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted, there is
no point trying to privately email me, I only get to see the messages
posted to the mailing list.

I reserve the right to be as hypocritical as the next person.


_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Private DNS (was: IP address or DNS name (bug or feature))

Walter H.
In reply to this post by Samuel Sieb
On Tue, June 6, 2017 07:40, Samuel Sieb wrote:

> .lan meets your requirements and I have seen that used.  Or you could
> make up something random.  Since it's just your private network, if the
> one you choose gets used later, you will have to change it again, but
> you'll have lots of warning.

I sent an email [hidden email] with the following question

"is there any TLD, I can use for private DNS¹?
Thanks,
Walter
¹ this is only inside my private LAN with RFC1918-IPv4 Adresses;"

the replied with the following:

Regarding your private network, if it will not be published on Internet,
you can use whatever you want. You may avoid to uses existing TLD's and
reserved ones (such as .test, .example, .lan etc.) just in case. You can
use for example .#myname# or .mathemainzel, it has to be "unique" .

So .lan. can't be used.

Greetings,
Walter
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: IP address or DNS name (bug or feature)

Robert Nichols-2
In reply to this post by Gordon Messmer-2
On 06/05/2017 11:31 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
>  As far as I know, there are no TLDs reserved for private networks.  All users should use properly registered domains for all DNS zones, private and public.

Swell. Happen to know of a registrar that will let me register a domain that has no public facing DNS server? (At pretty much zero cost, of course)

--
Bob Nichols     "NOSPAM" is really part of my email address.
                 Do NOT delete it.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: IP address or DNS name (bug or feature)

Matthew Miller-2
On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 09:38:39AM -0500, Robert Nichols wrote:
> Swell. Happen to know of a registrar that will let me register a
> domain that has no public facing DNS server? (At pretty much zero
> cost, of course)

Almost any registrar should let you do this.

--
Matthew Miller
<[hidden email]>
Fedora Project Leader
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: IP address or DNS name (bug or feature)

Walter H.
On 06.06.2017 16:43, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 09:38:39AM -0500, Robert Nichols wrote:
>> Swell. Happen to know of a registrar that will let me register a
>> domain that has no public facing DNS server? (At pretty much zero
>> cost, of course)
> Almost any registrar should let you do this.
>
mine told me,
that 2 DNS server are needed ..., and nobody is held to delegate
subdomains to private IP (RFC1918) DNS servers



_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]

smime.p7s (4K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: IP address or DNS name (bug or feature)

Doug
In reply to this post by Walter H.

On 06/05/2017 11:13 PM, Walter H. wrote:

> On Mon, June 5, 2017 22:25, Samuel Sieb wrote:
>> On 06/05/2017 11:44 AM, Walter H. wrote:
>>> On 05.06.2017 20:38, Samuel Sieb wrote:
>>>> nslookup resolved the .local addresses?  That's surprising and might
>>>> be a problem.
>>> I'm using inside my network a .local domain which is defined in a ZONE
>>> on my DNS - so no problem ...
>>>
>> Actually, that *IS* a problem.  You should not be doing that.  That is
>> quite likely the source of all your problems.  That domain name is
>> reserved for a specific purpose and putting it in DNS will cause
>> conflicts.
> Sorry, you're telling *BULLSHIT*; the TLD .local is exactly reserved for
> this purpose ...
>
> _______________________________________________
>
I'm not familiar with the use or misuse of .local, but I am having a problem
that might be related. I have a surveilance camera, which I am trying to
make work--
a Pyle PIPCAM5. My Linux is PCLinuxOS, but that probably is not germane.
Two
days ago I investigated the camera, which is (at the moment) connected
to the
lan by cat5 cable. Using nmap and one other program I got the responses
that the camera's
name is Android.local and I found the ip address and the MAC address
(which was
supposed to be on the bottom of the camera but wasn't). On that day, I
could ping
the camera by its ip or by its name, and the ping would work. I also
found that it
was made by Murata. Now the problem: yesterday and today it is inaccessible
by any means--ping by ip or name, or by nmap. I have tried connecting
and disconnecting
the lan cable, the power cable, and rebooted the router, but nothing
works. And since
I can't access it, if the name is a problem, there is no way to get to
it and change
the name, even if I knew how!  (Oh, I also tried to access it
wirelessly, but that
doesn't work either.)  What does TLD mean, anyway?

--doug
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: IP address or DNS name (bug or feature)

stan
In reply to this post by Robert Nichols-2
On Tue, 6 Jun 2017 09:38:39 -0500
Robert Nichols <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 06/05/2017 11:31 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> >  As far as I know, there are no TLDs reserved for private
> > networks.  All users should use properly registered domains for all
> > DNS zones, private and public.  
>
> Swell. Happen to know of a registrar that will let me register a
> domain that has no public facing DNS server? (At pretty much zero
> cost, of course)

I think this one will meet your requirements.  About $9 a year, and it
isn't necessary to use their DNS for the domain.  And they allow me to
use their address as the address of record for the domain.  I have no
affiliation with them, just use them.  There might be better deals out
there, but this one works with minimum hassle.  They have a comparison
feature, so you can compare them to their competitors.

https://www.namesilo.com/
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: IP address or DNS name (bug or feature)

foxec208


On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 1:32 PM, stan <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Tue, 6 Jun 2017 09:38:39 -0500
Robert Nichols <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 06/05/2017 11:31 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> >  As far as I know, there are no TLDs reserved for private
> > networks.  All users should use properly registered domains for all
> > DNS zones, private and public.
>
> Swell. Happen to know of a registrar that will let me register a
> domain that has no public facing DNS server? (At pretty much zero
> cost, of course)

I think this one will meet your requirements.  About $9 a year, and it
isn't necessary to use their DNS for the domain.  And they allow me to
use their address as the address of record for the domain.  I have no
affiliation with them, just use them.  There might be better deals out
there, but this one works with minimum hassle.  They have a comparison
feature, so you can compare them to their competitors.

https://www.namesilo.com/
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]


TLD -- Top Level Domain

_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
12345
Loading...