[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[leafnode-list] Re: Disabling The "Is Valid FQDN" Check

On Thu, 5 May 2011 14:20:51 +0100 Sabahattin Gucukoglu
<mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 2 May 2011, at 23:05, Whiskers wrote:
> > On Mon, 2 May 2011 15:37:56 +0100 Sabahattin Gucukoglu
> > <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


> > It's so long since I last installed Leafnode (my present installation
> > has been running for at least 4 years) that I can't remember; does
> > Leafnode refuse to run if the "hostname" of the machine isn't an
> > FQDN?  I'm quite sure it doesn't require the machine to have a name
> > that can be found on a public DNS server - mine certainly can't!
> Yeah, it goes out of its way, refusing to let you use many common
> "Local" designations, including .local, .localdomain, .test, .example
> (and all the example.* domains).  There's an entire source file devoted
> to this one little check, in fact.  But yes, DNS validation isn't done
> on the name, it only uses gethostname to find your hostname, then
> gethostbyname to get the addresses, then look up the aliases on those
> addresses to find the FQDN; it should work if you just edit /etc/hosts.
> Or you can just do what I did and set it directly in config (although it
> still makes a fuss and changes its opening banner accordingly).

I haven't tried to use any of the 'local' or 'reserved' domains for my 
local network - I've called it .private so perhaps that's why Leafnode 
didn't object to it?  (This laptop's hostname is tavy.mobile.private).


> > 2.  Anyway, my upstream server rewrites my message-ids,
> >> making the need to pick a name, pointless.  
> > 
> > Ghastly!  Change to a news-server that behaves better.  Having MIDs
> > that can be identified as yours, is an important part of your usenet
> > identity.
> I agree, but it's impossible.  Private news server.  I also suspect, now
> I've had Leafnode running for a while, that at least one of my
> newsreaders (Unison) isn't even *generating* Message-IDs itself.  So
> I'll have a look at the articles fetched through Leafnode once I begin
> posting through it.

Some clients have to be configured to generate their own MIDs; I have 
Leafnode set to generate good MIDs just in case the client doesn't - I 
sometimes try out different clients out of curiosity, although slrn always 
draws me back.  But no news-server should force its own MIDs if the client 
generates anything tolerable.

> > And, 3.  I do not like the
> >> idea of using a name - any name - not under my control, whether it
> >> exists in DNS or not.  MSGids must be globally unique, not valid; this
> >> is the new reality.  It is exactly the same thinking that makes any
> >> valid domain or domain name portion in munging a very bad idea.
> > 
> > I agree that the usenet and NNTP systems don't seem to break when MIDs
> > have nonsense to the right of the @ character.
> > 
> > An FQDN doesn't have to be listed on any DNS server; it doesn't even
> > have to be unique to one machine.  I think something like
> > mycomputer.local is a perfectly valid FQDN; it's certainly fine for a
> > "hostname", as far as I know.
> This doesn't seem to be the thinking of Leafnode's authors.  The current
> standards derive from mail, which makes the RHS of a Message-Id a SHOULD
> domain.  The emphasis is stronger in netnews because there are
> relatively more globally unique Message-IDs floating around out there,
> but it's still a SHOULD, for good reasons.  Some people simply don't
> have access to a domain or domain-like quantity that is not assuredly
> theirs.  

Technically, Leafnode is correct; but the real usenet is a lot more 
tolerant than the RFCs.

> I especially appreciate the way news.individual.net has handled
> this, setting aside mid.individual.net just for this use, and putting an
> entry in DNS with a TXT to make it valid, semantically and actually, as
> an FQDN.

Individual go even further than that; they allow users to generate 
personal FQDNs using their "user ID number", and even allow those FQDNs to 
be used when posting through other NSPs 

Some other NSPs offer similar options.

There are also independent sources of personal FQDNs for generating usenet 
MIDs, eg <http://th-h.de/fqdn/>.


> The machine isn't directly related to the domain, except in the tenuous
> since that I own both.  I agree, it's nebulous, but I think the check is
> an imposition and not a help.
> Cheers,
> Sabahattin

Leafnode isn't the only 'old school' program that expects all systems to 
conform with all RFCs and Unix 'best practice'.

-- ^^^^^^^^^^
--  Whiskers 
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
leafnode-list mailing list