gatorkram
Spelling and Grammer impared
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
clubs:
 ·Suddenlink
 ·Cirtex Hosting
|  No vanity hosts or PTR
Was just in support chat, hoping with my static IP, I could get a custom host, and PTR record setup.
They said it is not available, which I sort of found surprising considering they not only charge a $15 setup fee, but $4.95 a month.
I don't know who this should be pushed up to, but it sure would be nice to get more than just an IP, without the ability to have vanity hosts and ptr records changed.
I realize I could use a free service to have a host name pointed to my IP, but then that sort of defeats the whole point in having a static IP. Obviously nothing can change my PTR except for Embarq.
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death!
»/testhistory/661871/4f240 |
|
scooper
join:2000-07-11
Youngsville, NC | Ever heard of Dyndns.org ? |
|
gatorkram
Spelling and Grammer impared
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
clubs:
·Suddenlink
·Cirtex Hosting
| said by scooper  :Ever heard of Dyndns.org ? Maybe you missed this part of my post?
"I realize I could use a free service to have a host name pointed to my IP, but then that sort of defeats the whole point in having a static IP. Obviously nothing can change my PTR except for Embarq."
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death!
»/testhistory/661871/4f240 |
|
espaeth
Misanthrope
Premium
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
·Comcast
 ·Embarq
| reply to gatorkram
This has been brought up before a few times:
»Embarq - does not provide reverse DNS - what the F%^&?
»Any news on Static IP service front?
I can't find the particular post that I'm thinking of that was from an Embarq insider who said that the idea of allowing custom PTR records was discussed, but never gained traction toward becoming a reality either within Sprint or now under Embarq.
-Eric |
|
gatorkram
Spelling and Grammer impared
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
clubs:
·Suddenlink
·Cirtex Hosting
| Thanks for the links.
I wonder why they won't provide vanity ptr records. It's not like it takes more than two seconds for someone to setup.
I could understand wanting to keep someone from asking for changes over and over, but they could handle that with a fee.
I don't need it, it's not like I am running an email server or anything, it was more wanting some value out of the $4.95 a month.
I wasn't even expecting cross domain naming, like having my own domain, and using that as part of the host/ptr setup, I'd have been happy with something like gatorkram.embarqhsd.net hehe
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death!
»/testhistory/661871/4f240 |
|
JustARandomGuy
@embarqhsd.net | reply to gatorkram
I'll pass it along. Probably won't happen, but suggestions never hurt. |
|
Lets Golf
Premium
join:2006-01-05
Davenport, FL
| reply to gatorkram
said by gatorkram :Thanks for the links. I wonder why they won't provide vanity ptr records. It's not like it takes more than two seconds for someone to setup. I could understand wanting to keep someone from asking for changes over and over, but they could handle that with a fee. I don't need it, it's not like I am running an email server or anything, it was more wanting some value out of the $4.95 a month. I wasn't even expecting cross domain naming, like having my own domain, and using that as part of the host/ptr setup, I'd have been happy with something like gatorkram.embarqhsd.net hehe Vanity PTR records are not available at this time. If you are residential, they will never be available, as with any ISP residential service. |
|
gatorkram
Spelling and Grammer impared
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
clubs: | Yeah, it's just kind of a bummer. Not much value when you look at the setup fee, plus a monthly fee.
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death!
»/testhistory/661871/4f240 |
|
espaeth
Misanthrope
Premium
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN | Depends on what you're doing, I guess.
For anything that involves IP-level configuration (ie, firewalls, Apache .htaccess restrictions, SSH RSA-key allowed-hosts) the static IP is well worth $4.95/mo.
-Eric |
|
xheliox
join:2004-11-14
Altamonte Springs, FL
| reply to gatorkram
What may be a trivial thing to do from a technical perspective, may not be from a management perspective within a company the size of Embarq.
How many hands would the order have to pass thru? How many extra minutes per order would it take? I can surely see why they wouldn't offer it...
Though I'd use it if they did.  |
|
gbh2o
join:2000-12-18
Greenville, NC
 ·STANAPHONE
·Voxee
·VBUZZER
·VOIPo
·Embarq
·callwithus
·MyPhoneCompany
·Axvoice
·Packet8
| reply to gatorkram
Then again there are always the Embarq-ignored ARIN policy requirements to submit information for /29 and higher assignment:
"Provide reassignment information for /29 and shorter prefix lengths using the Shared WHOIS Project (SWIP) or by providing the same information fields in an RWHOIS server."
Business DSL customers are not even provided the courtesy of that compliance. Commercial level mail servers and such function _much_ better in an environment with rDNS available. Helps improve the 'trust' levels. |
|
espaeth
Misanthrope
Premium
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
·Comcast
·Embarq
| said by gbh2o :Then again there are always the Embarq-ignored ARIN policy requirements to submit information for /29 and higher assignment: This policy hasn't gained wide adoption because it would work out very poorly from an abuse standpoint. ISPs and hosting providers are on the hook with their upstream carriers for keeping spam/phishing and other abuse under control, so when someone does an IP-based lookup for abuse contact / ownership information ISPs want their contact info to come up so they can stay ahead of the game. Saidcom, a server colocation/hosting facility and ISP, found this out the hard way when they were completely shut off from the Internet for several months due to unanswered abuse complaints.
said by gbh2o :Commercial level mail servers and such function _much_ better in an environment with rDNS available. Helps improve the 'trust' levels. There's a few key criteria that are generally used for mail acceptance, but with most of the DNS-based checks you are trying to catch someone in a lie rather than trying to establish trust.
Say I get myself a box on the Internet and setup a mail server, and because I control the PTR records in DNS I setup its reverse to resolve to "mail.microsoft.com". When I try to connect to another mail server it will typically do a PTR lookup to get my reverse DNS address and get "mail.microsoft.com", but when it goes to look up "mail.microsoft.com" it doesn't get the same IP address back. That server will have caught me in a lie, and can now make a judgment that my email has a higher probability of not being legitimate.
That's not to say that all servers that have DNS/rDNS consistency are legitimate servers. Spammers have figured this out and have used servers that are fully compliant with regards to forward/reverse DNS matching, and many have even gone as far as to publish SPF records to appear legitimate. SPF suffers from the same problem in establishing credibility because anybody can register a domain without being vetted in any way, so you have no way of knowing the legitimacy of a domain or its owner(s); you can only tell when a server is trying to hijack another valid domain. In the case of Embarq, your forward and reverse DNS addresses match today based on what they assign, so your address is already deemed neutral in a DNS-based check.
The bigger issue coming from Embarq address space is going to be RBLs, which despite using the DNS system are actually IP-based. If you're connecting from 1.2.3.4, for instance, on Spamcop you'd look up 4.3.2.1.bl.spamcom.net and if you get a returned value then the IP is listed in the block list. Even if you're a competent mail administrator you are coming out of address space that is primarily being used by residential customers. It's a bit like being an innocent man in prison, because many people will already make a determination on your (or your server's) legitimacy based on where you are located.
-Eric
|
|
Lets Golf
Premium
join:2006-01-05
Davenport, FL
edit:
January 31st, @07:18AM
| reply to gbh2o
said by gbh2o :Then again there are always the Embarq-ignored ARIN policy requirements to submit information for /29 and higher assignment: "Provide reassignment information for /29 and shorter prefix lengths using the Shared WHOIS Project (SWIP) or by providing the same information fields in an RWHOIS server." Business DSL customers are not even provided the courtesy of that compliance. Commercial level mail servers and such function _much_ better in an environment with rDNS available. Helps improve the 'trust' levels. Embarq is in full compliance with Arin. DSL customers do not "own" their static IP addresses. These addresses are assigned to the aggregators from which they are assigned. If you move, you do not have the luxury of taking your IP's with you, as with a Business class circuit. You may not think so, but the way you're applying Arin's policy to Embarq is incorrect. That much is true and has been verified by them. |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to Lets Golf
said by Lets Golf :Vanity PTR records are not available at this time. If you are residential, they will never be available, as with any ISP residential service. Are you certain that there are no residential ISPs which offer custom PTR records? I found one:
»DSL Extreme FAQ »Can I get custom reverse DNS for my IP(s)?
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
gatorkram
Spelling and Grammer impared
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
clubs:
·Suddenlink
·Cirtex Hosting
| said by NormanS :said by Lets Golf :Vanity PTR records are not available at this time. If you are residential, they will never be available, as with any ISP residential service. Are you certain that there are no residential ISPs which offer custom PTR records? I found one: » DSL Extreme FAQ » Can I get custom reverse DNS for my IP(s)? ROFL
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death!
»/testhistory/661871/4f240 |
|
Lets Golf
Premium
join:2006-01-05
Davenport, FL | reply to NormanS
Good Call
So most residential ISP's don't offer PTR records |
|
Maxo
Your tax dollars at work.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL
clubs: | reply to NormanS
When I worked with SBC I know that we did offer PTR. I'm pretty sure that Bellsouth does to, but I wouldn't swear on it. |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| 'at&t Yahoo! HSI' (formerly SBC) will set up PTR records, but I don't know if their static IP packages qualify as "residential". They will sell a /29 block of IP addresses to residential users, but the price is around $80 (depending on the package). And the IP addresses are "sticky static" (similar to MAC address reservation in some SOHO routers), not true static.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
sestrada
join:2008-01-01
·Embarq
| reply to Lets Golf
Embarq is in full compliance with Arin Not exactly.
Look here »www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four2372
4.2.3.7.2. /29s and larger nets
ISPs must provide reassignment information on the entire previously allocated block(s) via SWIP or RWHOIS server for /29 or larger blocks. For blocks smaller than /29 and for internal space, ISPs should provide utilization data using the format described in Section 4.2.3.7.5. We got an Embarq /29 block. No rwhois and denied requests to change PTR to match our A records. |
|
gbh2o
join:2000-12-18
Greenville, NC
·STANAPHONE
·Voxee
·VBUZZER
·VOIPo
·Embarq
·callwithus
·MyPhoneCompany
·Axvoice
·Packet8
| reply to Lets Golf
said by Lets Golf :said by gbh2o :"Provide reassignment information for /29 and shorter prefix lengths using the Shared WHOIS Project (SWIP) or by providing the same information fields in an RWHOIS server." Embarq is in full compliance with Arin. DSL customers do not "own" their static IP addresses. These addresses are assigned to the aggregators from which they are assigned. If you move, you do not have the luxury of taking your IP's with you, as with a Business class circuit. You may not think so, but the way you're applying Arin's policy to Embarq is incorrect. That much is true and has been verified by them. It appears we will disagree. Embarq in _not_ in compliance with the cited ARIN policy section "4.2.3.7.2. /29s and larger nets." It is strange that no one at Embarq has ever challenged the veracity of my claim. In fact, they have agreed with me but have claimed to be currently incapable of compliance, although they are studying it for possible future implementation and complance. One would certainly think they would be eager to provide any citation proving their compliance.
I believe a re-read of the applicable sections cited, in the context in which they are written, will be clearly seen to be applicable. It is _specifically_ applicable to how _ISPs_ are to report "Reassigning Address Space to Customers" they have, and in particular, for "/29s and larger nets."
At no time have I claimed to an end-user to whom ARIN may directly assign address space which is what I believe you are referring to as a "Business class circuit". That is governed by a different section of IP4 policy, "4.3. End-users - Assignments to end-user" for reference. |
|
