Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Dan Kaminsky Suggests Having Fun with DNS

Posted by timothy on Mon Jun 21, 2004 05:38 PM
from the bits-is dept.
boogahsmalls writes "A few weekends ago Dan Kaminsky of scanrand fame presented some pretty cool ideas involving DNS that made plenty of heads spin at the LayerOne Technology Conference. Some of his concepts included Voice over DNS and storing Knoppix in a DNS cache. He's also apparently got a couple new tools in the pipe including a scanrand based DNS scanner and a visualization suite. Could another version of Paketto Keiretsu be in the works?" (OpenOffice.org does a great job of opening the PowerPoint slideshow.)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • No thanks, (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 21 2004, @05:39PM (#9489510)
    I'd rather my dns just work.
  • Nice ideas (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 21 2004, @05:40PM (#9489513)
    but who doesn't have Knoppix in the DNS cache already anyway? Welcome to the 21st century buddy.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 21 2004, @05:42PM (#9489530)
    I'd rather read his slides in binary from IN A records than open powerpoint.
  • RTFPP? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Nethead (1563) <joe@nethead.com> on Monday June 21 2004, @05:43PM (#9489540)
    (http://left-wing.org/ | Last Journal: Tuesday December 27 2005, @03:44PM)
    Now we have to Read The Fsckin' Power Point?
    • Re:RTFPP? by MisanthropicProgram (Score:2) Monday June 21 2004, @05:52PM
      • Re:RTFPP? by Masami Eiri (Score:2) Monday June 21 2004, @06:04PM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:RTFPP? by Eideewt (Score:1) Tuesday June 22 2004, @02:11PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Great Article (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 21 2004, @05:44PM (#9489548)
    It's a pity most of the slashdot crowd won't understand any of its technical merits at all.
    Mark this as flamebait if you will, but come back in a while and read the comments, I promise there will be hardly any discussion of the paper.

    Dan is obviously a very smart guy, I like his ideas about using http tunnel (it's a great program), I'm going to have to give some of these ideas a work out!

    Bob
    • Re:Great Article (Score:5, Insightful)

      by wwest4 (183559) on Monday June 21 2004, @05:50PM (#9489598)
      The presentation is intriguing, but like any typical slideshow, lacking in specifics (things like "stuff=cool" aren't terribly telling). Unless you already know the DNS pretty well, it would be hard to infer the nitty-gritty of the talk from this ppt without thinking pretty hard about it, and you shouldn't fault a diverse group of geeks from different nerd realms for not being DNS power users.

      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Great Article by Anonymous Coward (Score:3) Monday June 21 2004, @05:56PM
        • Re:Great Article by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday June 21 2004, @05:59PM
        • Re:Great Article by wwest4 (Score:3) Monday June 21 2004, @06:08PM
        • well, I skipped installing... by zogger (Score:1) Monday June 21 2004, @06:48PM
          • This paragraph is random crap to keep that fscking lame slash lameness filter happy, please ignore it. Getting this past TFLSLF was five times harder than copy-pasting the individual text elements. This paragraph is random crap to keep TFLSLF happy, please ignore it. Getting this past TFLSLF was five times harder than copy-pasting the individual text elements. This paragraph is random crap to keep TFLSLF happy, please ignore it. Getting this past TFLSLF was five times harder than copy-pasting the individual text elements. This paragraph is random crap to keep TFLSLF happy, please ignore it. Getting this past TFLSLF was five times harder than copy-pasting the individual text elements. This paragraph is random crap to keep TFLSLF happy, please ignore it. Getting this past TFLSLF was five times harder than copy-pasting the individual text elements. This paragraph is random crap to keep TFLSLF happy, please ignore it. Getting this past TFLSLF was five times harder than copy-pasting the individual text elements. This paragraph is random crap to keep TFLSLF happy, please ignore it. Getting this past TFLSLF was five times harder than copy-pasting the individual text elements.

            This paragraph is random crap to keep TFLSLF happy, please ignore it. Getting this past TFLSLF was five times harder than copy-pasting the individual text elements. This paragraph is random crap to keep TFLSLF happy, please ignore it. Getting this past TFLSLF was five times harder than copy-pasting the individual text elements. This paragraph is random crap to keep TFLSLF happy, please ignore it. Getting this past TFLSLF was five times harder than copy-pasting the individual text elements. This paragraph is random crap to keep TFLSLF happy, please ignore it. Getting this past TFLSLF was five times harder than copy-pasting the individual text elements. This paragraph is random crap to keep TFLSLF happy, please ignore it. Getting this past TFLSLF was five times harder than copy-pasting the individual text elements. This paragraph is random crap to keep TFLSLF happy, please ignore it. Getting this past TFLSLF was five times harder than copy-pasting the individual text elements. This paragraph is random crap to keep TFLSLF happy, please ignore it. Getting this past TFLSLF was five times harder than copy-pasting the individual text elements.

            Black Ops 2004 @ LayerOne

            Dan Kaminsky

            ===page===break===

            Introduction
            • Who am I?
              • Senior Security Consultant, Avaya Enterprise Security Practice
              • Author of "Paketto Keiretsu", a collection of advanced TCP/IP manipulation tools
              • Speaker at Black Hat Briefings
              • Black Ops of TCP/IP series
              • Gateway Cryptography w/ OpenSSH
              • Protocol Geek

            ===page===break===
            What's On The Plate for Today?
            /* char descrip[256] = "You'll see"; */

            ===page===break===

            What is DNS
            • DNS: Domain Name System
              • Mechanism for translating human-readable names into machine routable addresses
            • "Like 411 for the Internet"
              • As 411 usually but not always yields simple phone numbers, DNS usually but not always yields IP addresses
              • A: Given name, find IP
              • MX: Given name, find Mail
              • PTR: Given IP, find name
              • TXT: Given name, find "stuff"

            ===page===break===

            "Useful" Traits of DNS
            (Very Very Abridged)
            • Hierarchical
              • .com says where to find addresses in .doxpara.com, and .doxpara.com says where to find addresses in foo.doxpara.com
            • Recursive vs. Iterative Lookups
              • Iterative Lookup: Ask a server a question, it tells you where to go to find out the answer
              • Recursive Lookup: Ask a server, it goes out and finds out the answer for you, and tells you
              • It queries the hierarchy - which you may control
            [ Parent ]
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Great Article by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday June 21 2004, @05:52PM
      • Re:Great Article by mattyrobinson69 (Score:1) Tuesday June 22 2004, @04:48AM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Great Article by headisdead (Score:1) Monday June 21 2004, @05:56PM
    • Re:Great Article (Score:5, Interesting)

      by jovetoo (629494) on Monday June 21 2004, @07:31PM (#9490253)
      (Last Journal: Tuesday June 22 2004, @04:22PM)

      His techniques allow someone to set up a cryptographically secure network that most likely completely ignores firewalls. It features high bandwidth-high latency connection, low bandwidth-low latency connections and is virtually untraceable, even to both parties involved in the connection. An initial hostname and time would act as the 'phonenumber'. (By keeping a certain request alive, one can even implement a dailing service with TTL delay.) A message service is freely included.

      It is virtually impossible to shut these networks down without replacing/patching dns. Not an easy task.
      The bandwidth available to this network most likely exceeds that of most irc-botnets. Especially since the root servers are defending themselves against DDoS attacks.

      The tools he's still developing might be able to trace these things but it will still require cooperation of dns server administrators (to get their logs). You will never get them all and you'll have a LOT data to process. Accorfing to this [internetnews.com] the ICS root server continuosly handles almost 8Mbps (and can handle upto 80Mbps) of traffic. I seriously doubt they can log that... (if so, transferring the logs would continually consume a healthy percent of the servers bandwidth.)

      Pretty smart man indeed and very idealistic or shortsighted. Both the right and the wrong sort of people would pay a lot of money for that...

      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Great Article by rasz (Score:1) Monday June 21 2004, @08:01PM
    • Re:Great Article by rasz (Score:3) Monday June 21 2004, @08:07PM
    • Re:Great Article by aminorex (Score:2) Monday June 21 2004, @08:49PM
    • Dan Kaminsky by Glamdrlng (Score:2) Monday June 21 2004, @10:05PM
    • Re:Great Article (Score:5, Informative)

      by magefile (776388) on Monday June 21 2004, @07:04PM (#9490078)
      I'd suggest Open Office. If you're on a dialup, and don't want to install several hundred megs, then look at the google cache - it'll have an HTML-ized version.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Great Article by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Monday June 21 2004, @07:49PM
    • Re:Great Article by Glamdrlng (Score:3) Monday June 21 2004, @10:14PM
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Search Service (Score:5, Funny)

    by OzPhIsH (560038) on Monday June 21 2004, @05:45PM (#9489557)
    (Last Journal: Saturday November 30 2002, @01:53AM)
    Gee, maybe they could make the results of any unresolved queries forward users to a handy search page, instead of returning an appropriate 'not found' response!
  • by YouGotServed (790258) on Monday June 21 2004, @05:45PM (#9489558)
    Microsoft Powerpoint also does a great job of opening the PowerPoint slideshow.
  • Crazy! (Score:5, Insightful)

    Most people are lucky if DNS just works without major headaches.

    I could swear BIND and its config file is considered, along with Sendmail, one of the most convoluted programs in Internetdom. It, again along with Sendmail, is historically also one of the most bug-ridden and exploited.

    And now someone is suggesting futzing around with it?! Why not just change your domain to "rootmeplease.com" and get it over with?

    -Charles
    • Re:Crazy! by DarkFencer (Score:2) Monday June 21 2004, @05:51PM
      • Re:Crazy! (Score:4, Informative)

        by Dwonis (52652) * on Monday June 21 2004, @05:53PM (#9489610)
        It's easy. Use djbdns for a little while. BIND stars to look very sendmail-esque after that.
        [ Parent ]
        • Re:Crazy! by Carnildo (Score:2) Monday June 21 2004, @06:09PM
          • Put up or shut up. by DAldredge (Score:1) Monday June 21 2004, @06:11PM
            • Re:Put up or shut up. (Score:4, Interesting)

              by Carnildo (712617) on Monday June 21 2004, @07:10PM (#9490119)
              (http://www.crfh.net/ | Last Journal: Tuesday November 14 2006, @02:47PM)
              http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/guarantee.html

              The djbdns security guarantee
              I offer $500 to the first person to publicly report a verifiable security hole in the latest version of djbdns.

              Examples of problems that do not qualify:

              * Denial-of-service attacks. (BIND 9's fragility makes denial of service completely trivial; but an attacker can easily take down the Domain Name System without using any of BIND's bugs. The DNS architecture needs to be decentralized.)


              Says it right there. It's a DoS attack that, by means of a series of specially-selected queries, forces worst-case behavior out of the caching algorithm.
              [ Parent ]
            • Cracking Contests Not Useful by bill_mcgonigle (Score:2) Wednesday June 23 2004, @09:40AM
          • Re: Crazy! by ldspartan (Score:1) Monday June 21 2004, @07:16PM
          • Re:Crazy! by mkettler (Score:2) Monday June 21 2004, @10:43PM
          • Re:Crazy! by Electrum (Score:2) Tuesday June 22 2004, @10:55AM
        • Re:Crazy! by ideut (Score:1) Monday June 21 2004, @06:19PM
          • Re:Crazy! by Cylix (Score:2) Monday June 21 2004, @07:30PM
            • Re:Crazy! by ideut (Score:1) Monday June 21 2004, @07:47PM
              • Re:Crazy! by kelnos (Score:2) Tuesday June 22 2004, @12:26PM
              • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
        • Re:Crazy! by Feyr (Score:3) Monday June 21 2004, @07:01PM
          • Re:Crazy! by murgee (Score:1) Monday June 21 2004, @07:19PM
            • Re:Crazy! by Asgard (Score:2) Monday June 21 2004, @07:24PM
          • Re:Crazy! by Dwonis (Score:2) Monday June 21 2004, @09:59PM
          • Re:Crazy! by Bert64 (Score:2) Tuesday June 22 2004, @08:12AM
            • Re:Crazy! by Feyr (Score:2) Tuesday June 22 2004, @08:33AM
              • Re:Crazy! by Bert64 (Score:2) Wednesday June 23 2004, @03:16AM
          • Re:Crazy! by Feyr (Score:2) Monday June 21 2004, @09:04PM
          • Re:Crazy! by pyrrhonist (Score:3) Monday June 21 2004, @09:28PM
          • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
        • Re:Crazy! by mabinogi (Score:1) Monday June 21 2004, @07:35PM
          • Re:Crazy! by geminidomino (Score:2) Friday June 25 2004, @11:30AM
        • djbdns violates multiple RFCs by SuperBanana (Score:2) Monday June 21 2004, @11:27PM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Crazy! by flonker (Score:2) Monday June 21 2004, @05:54PM
    • Re:Crazy! by wwest4 (Score:2) Monday June 21 2004, @05:54PM
    • Re:Crazy! by Linux_ho (Score:2) Monday June 21 2004, @06:10PM
  • Nasty Nasty HTML Version (Score:5, Informative)

    by OverlordQ (264228) * on Monday June 21 2004, @05:46PM (#9489564)
    (Last Journal: Thursday February 15 2007, @08:00PM)
    Enjoy [thedarkcitadel.com]

    Note: Was converted with *gasp*powerpoint so yes it is horrible :)
  • Heh (Score:1, Redundant)

    by mfh (56) on Monday June 21 2004, @05:47PM (#9489574)
    (http://put-your-mone...r-mouth-is.com/blog/ | Last Journal: Monday January 29 2007, @02:44PM)
    We nerds sure are playful, ain't we? Voice over DNS... sounds like a recipe for disaster, or dollars.
  • Paketto Keiretsu (Score:2)

    by H310iSe (249662) on Monday June 21 2004, @05:50PM (#9489596)
    "Could another version of Paketto Keiretsu be in the works?"

    Silly poster, the article's link to Dan's website brings you to the new tools (in "prebuild three"). Can someone please get a .torrent up?

    Those are some seriously amazing gadgets in there, but I have to say I've yet to actually, you know, use one in any particular way.... yet I'm excited there are more out! I somehow want to know I could store knoppix in DNS even if I'm not likely to actually do it.
  • by OverlordQ (264228) * on Monday June 21 2004, @05:51PM (#9489601)
    (Last Journal: Thursday February 15 2007, @08:00PM)
    Conclusion
    Stuff = Cool
    More Stuff Soon


    This guy is amazing! Where does he come up with this stuff! ;)
  • SPF and SPF+ work over DNS (Score:4, Informative)

    by ideut (240078) on Monday June 21 2004, @05:57PM (#9489636)
    Dan isn't the first one to suggest novel new applications for the DNS. Many will also be familiar with SPF, the "spam permitted from" framework for defining permitted email senders. Microsoft have recently taken over the standard process and are proposing for the sender permission rules to be sent in XML format over DNS!

    The open source community's response so far has been SPF+ [listbox.com], which is essentially a technique of encoding the rules in TCL, which is served over DNS and executed on the mailserver. For obvious reasons, SPF+ will probably define the future of spam control on the internet.

  • by mcrbids (148650) on Monday June 21 2004, @06:08PM (#9489702)
    (http://www.lookuplaws.com/ | Last Journal: Sunday November 18, @06:33PM)
    Forget the current legal nightmare of this proposal - just roll with me...

    This guy proposes putting content (eg Knoppix) into DNS.

    Why is DNS particularly not well suited for this kind of distribution mechanism?

    Seems to me that if the RIAA wanted to distribute their movies via broadband providers (an inevitability, I'm afraid) the biggest problem would be dealing with BANDWIDTH.

    I always figured that ISPs would have to have some way to cache content locally so their Internet pipes don't get absolutely HAMMERED by all the people viewing the latest flick...

    DNS already has a mature, stable, and lightweight caching mechanism in place. Why not use it?

    Honestly, caching content a la DNS might provide a MUCH more efficient content distribution mechanism than, say, BitTorrent.

    Where's the bad part of this idea?
    • by markov_chain (202465) on Monday June 21 2004, @06:24PM (#9489815)
      Content would probably get cached better with BT than DNS because of the dynamically constructed network topology. The caching in DNS works as well as it does because it happens along the domain name hierarchy (duh). The default topology probably wouldn't be very efficient for content.

      Further, DNS would need to be upgraded. There is a good reason that short-term, experimental applications are better done at the ends; read the End-to-end arguments in system design [reed.com] for further insights.
      [ Parent ]
    • bad part of the idea by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday June 21 2004, @06:31PM
    • by kryptkpr (180196) on Monday June 21 2004, @06:33PM (#9489861)
      (http://slashdot.org/)
      Where's the bad part of this idea?

      1) I think the requirement for caching sets of 4 byte IP addresses and 4 GB movies are quite different. Just because a system is good at one, doesn't mean it will automatically be good at the other. When I RTFA, the author made it quite clear that there was a 512-byte packet size limit, of which only around 50% could be useful for actual data. By the author's own estimation, it would take 35,000 DNS servers to host a single 700mb Knoppix image.

      2) DNS is already an overloaded system, and his idea uses recursion, so it would place even more load on top of it.

      If you think this is going to replace BitTorrent, you're off your rocker.
      [ Parent ]
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Some of this stuff really makes alot of sense by abertoll (Score:2) Monday June 21 2004, @06:35PM
    • Re:Some of this stuff really makes alot of sense by photon317 (Score:2) Monday June 21 2004, @06:42PM
    • Forget the current legal nightmare of this proposal - just roll with me...

      Were that we could...

      Why is DNS particularly not well suited for this kind of distribution mechanism?

      Because DNS is designed to handle its hierarchical data, not massive amounts of content? The extra fields available in DNS are there fo, well, DNS related stuff.

      Seems to me that if the RIAA wanted to distribute their movies via broadband providers (an inevitability, I'm afraid) the biggest problem would be dealing with BANDWIDTH.

      I know you meant the MPAA, not the RIAA, but I think their biggest problem will be letting go of their deep seated need for control, rather than bandwidth. They can afford the pipe. And I, for one, would be incredibly pissed off to find the RIAA (or any other commercial service) caching their stuff on MY name server.

      I always figured that ISPs would have to have some way to cache content locally so their Internet pipes don't get absolutely HAMMERED by all the people viewing the latest flick...

      Like, say, USENET?

      DNS already has a mature, stable, and lightweight caching mechanism in place. Why not use it?

      We do. Millions of times a day. We use it every time we translate a name to an IP number. Looking up, say www.slashdot.org

      Honestly, caching content a la DNS might provide a MUCH more efficient content distribution mechanism than, say, BitTorrent.

      Highly unlikely. A highly effecient system dedicated to caching content will almost certainly be better than trying to do the same thing with DNS. It's simply not made for it.

      Where's the bad part of this idea?

      Inefficiency. Load on already stressed servers. Better existing solutions. Should I go on?

      Dan's come up with some brilliant ideas over time. Definately A Geek's Geek. But this one sounds a lot more like one of his thought experiments than an actual proposal. Like directly burning CD's over an SSH tunnel...

      [ Parent ]
    • by strabo (58457) on Monday June 21 2004, @07:09PM (#9490106)
      (http://localhost/)
      DNS already has a mature, stable, and lightweight caching mechanism in place. Why not use it?

      What part of the word lightweight don't you understand?

      [ Parent ]
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • PDF Link (Score:5, Informative)

    by kryptkpr (180196) on Monday June 21 2004, @06:08PM (#9489704)
    (http://slashdot.org/)
    PDF Conversion [mountaincable.net] of powerpoint presentation

    On my ISP's very fast webspace, but please post mirrors in case they decide to pull the plug.
    • Re:PDF Link by zsau (Score:2) Monday June 21 2004, @08:06PM
      • Re:PDF Link by kryptkpr (Score:2) Monday June 21 2004, @08:25PM
        • Re:PDF Link by zsau (Score:1) Monday June 21 2004, @08:37PM
        • Re:PDF Link by Lars T. (Score:1) Tuesday June 22 2004, @05:02AM
  • Where's the innovation? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Have Blue (616) on Monday June 21 2004, @06:12PM (#9489730)
    (http://www.seizurerobots.com/)
    DNS is just a pervasive and well-organized caching broadcast protocol, isn't it? Right now, all it's been used to transmit is mappings of ASCII strings to IP addresses, and ancillary data related to that. Why is using it to transmit anything else particularly innovative? We didn't see this much enthusiasm when someone figured out how to send Knoppix over HTTP or Usenet.
  • by NemosomeN (670035) on Monday June 21 2004, @06:20PM (#9489785)
    (Last Journal: Friday May 20 2005, @08:54AM)
    Discussed YEARS ago with the possibility to sticking the source of DeCSS into a DNS cache (Among other things). I would put the source in an HTML comment here, but alas, no comment tags.
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • PDF version (Score:2)

    by Dwonis (52652) * on Monday June 21 2004, @06:26PM (#9489820)
    The PDF file [dlitz.net] (created using OpenOffice.org) is here (8.7 MB .torrent).
  • anybody remember DNS MUDs? (Score:5, Informative)

    by andrewagill (700624) on Monday June 21 2004, @06:36PM (#9489890)
    (http://www.needsfoodbadly.com/)
    You used to be able to play a text adventure game with DNS:
    ]$
    nslookup - hastur.rlyeh.net
    > set querytype=txt
    > set domain=adventure
    > 1
    Alas, hastur has been down since around 1998, but you can still live the magic if you believe in yourself [fataldimensions.org]!
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 21 2004, @06:45PM (#9489959)
    Dan's got some interesting ideas, I'll grant you. But considering how scanrand has toasted network equipment I've run it against in the past, I don't think I'm too keen on his take on this. The tunneling angle is interesting, but when he gets to content distribution - it starts to look like a DNS stress tester more than a useful application, and considering how akamai got hosed for a bit last week, I sure hope that not many people play around with Dan's ideas unless they have a clue as to what they're doing. Needing 35,000 servers to xfer 700MB's of data at a reasonable speed is NOT an interesting hack, but it sure sounds similar in some principles to a mass DDoS.
  • Yea baby! (Score:4, Insightful)

    Ok, so let's do this:

    We've got the Kaminsky protocol connected to the
    DNS protocol
    the DNS protocol's connected to the
    UDP protocol
    The UDP protocol's connected to the
    IP protocol
    Oh hear the word of the inefficient!


    The second verse is left as an exercise for the reader. Please keep in mind that writing another verse is somewhat more productive than implementing the aforementioned Kaminsky protocol.

    -Adam
  • protocol inversion (Score:1)

    by drxyzzy (149370) on Monday June 21 2004, @07:39PM (#9490308)
    I don't get it. It sounds like another protocol inversion:
    UDP over DNS. OTOH we have seen IT managers solemnly accepting
    RPC over HTTP (SOAP) and TCP over HTTP (Web Services). ;-)
  • Whee, Slashdotted (Score:1, Informative)

    by Effugas (2378) on Monday June 21 2004, @07:40PM (#9490316)
    (http://www.doxpara.com/)
    You know that whole thing, where you come back from a trip to Vegas only to see a metric ton (expletive removed) of work sitting in your inbox?

    Hi. Ask questions, I'll reply and eventually integrate into the Doxpara home page.

    --Dan
  • Great ideas! (Score:2)

    by metamatic (202216) on Monday June 21 2004, @08:24PM (#9490562)
    (http://www.pobox.com/~meta/ | Last Journal: Sunday February 29 2004, @09:19AM)
    DNS is the essential infrastructure required for almost all Internet applications to function correctly... so let's fuck with it and create some cool hacks, and use it to implement stuff that's already been done much better using other protocols! I mean, what could possibly go wrong?
  • Re:Win2k DNS (Score:2, Insightful)

    by MisanthropicProgram (763655) on Monday June 21 2004, @06:05PM (#9489687)
    Or...maybe he really doesn't understand. You see, kiddo, those of us who've been in this business for a decade or longer know that you can't know everything. Those who say they know everything or are experts are mistaken or lying. This biz is just too large and diverse to know everything.

    In other words kid, don't fuck with us old guys or we'll show you who knows shit!

    [ Parent ]
  • Once reading the article you would understand.

    If you put the presentation in DNS it would not be a problem.
    [ Parent ]
  • Re:Win2k DNS (Score:2, Interesting)

    by mabinogi (74033) on Monday June 21 2004, @07:42PM (#9490322)
    (http://cumulo-nimbus.com/)
    I honestly don't know either. But apparently DNS is hard, even when you're using W2K.
    I've never figured out how one of our network people was able to ACCIDENTLY add an NS record for one of our web servers instead of an A record, and I've definitely never figured out how it is that they couldn't understand what the problem was or how to fix it. They use Win2K on the DNS servers.

    If it'd been Bind, they wouldn't have made the mistake in the first place, because there is no way you would accidently type "NS" instead of "A". Not to mention the fact that they probably wouldn't have attempted to make the change, and would have waited until the person who knew what he was doing was back.

    I'm assuming that the person in question randomly clicked stuff until he had somewhere he could put a server name in....
    [ Parent ]
  • Re:oh wow! (Score:2)

    by Dwonis (52652) * on Monday June 21 2004, @09:54PM (#9491297)
    "OpenOffice.org" is the name of the office suite. www.openoffice.org [openoffice.org] is the name of the website.
    [ Parent ]
  • Re:oh wow! (Score:1)

    by Wedge1212 (591767) on Monday June 21 2004, @10:21PM (#9491507)
    I really hope you're a wise ass :)
    [ Parent ]
  • 13 replies beneath your current threshold.