North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Possible login/password grabbing ploy

  • From: Christopher Caldwell
  • Date: Wed May 13 09:36:16 1998

We went through the same thing with them.  The instructions at are incorrect (at last viewing) -> NSI bulletin 097-003
| Zone file access and say send an
e-mail to [email protected]  This is not correct.  You must send an
e-mail to [email protected] with the information requested in the
bulletin.  I told them about this error back in mid-February.

Moreover, they weren't granting access to anyone for awhile (thanks for
telling us); apparently, they weren't comfortable with some aspect of the
access process.  After a month or two of waiting, they granted me access.

Meanwhile, I called them and got them to run a database dump of each of my
NS hosts, and I used the dump to check for lame delegations.  The database
dump doesn't have the 256 host limit.

It turns out that the database dump is actually more useful than the zone
file access.  It would be really nice if they'd 1) do away with the 256
host limit, and/or 2) provide an interface to the database that would allow
you to check the data on your hosts.


At 02:29 AM 5/13/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Only if they chose to believe you have a good enough reason for wanting
>them.  I wanted them for what I thought was a totally legit purpose...we
>were preparing to renumber, and as part of the task of renumbering, I
>wanted to compile a list of all domains for which we're supposed to be
>authorative.  I was told "that's not good enough...send us the DNS server
>info, we'll run the search and let you know how it turns out."  I did so,
>and never heard back.
>The renumbering is now done...and I never did get to compile a list of all
>the domains we're lame for.
> Jon Lewis <[email protected]>  |  Not good enough for Internic :(   |
> Network Administrator       |                                  ||||\   
> Florida Digital Turnpike    |                                 
>______ for PGP public key____