Document reasoning to block DNS to 127.0.0.1

Re:Document reasoning to block DNS to 127.0.0.1 by albert_e on Tuesday June 20, 2023 @01:50AM (#36400221)

> park wildcard sub-domains on 127.0.0.1

that sounds like a good practice -- why is this not done more often I wonder.

EDIT: on a second thought i am not so sure. I am not an expert here so I will not try to guess :)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Document reasoning to block DNS to 127.0.0.1 by pravus on Tuesday June 20, 2023 @03:17AM (#36400719)

In my experience most DNS admins abhor the idea of putting private IP addresses in public DNS space and it's simply not even an option they consider. I've used weird DNS tricks like this for years and never really encountered any issues, though. I currently have both my wireguard and private IP networks published to public DNS to make my life easier, for example.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Document reasoning to block DNS to 127.0.0.1 by tentacleuno on Tuesday June 20, 2023 @06:36AM (#36402063)

I allow it. I use A records to set individual subdomains of my personal domain to individual Tailscale IPs. Then, when Tailscale is connected, all is well. Is this worth a telling off?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Document reasoning to block DNS to 127.0.0.1 by halJordan on Wednesday June 21, 2023 @12:11PM (#36420407)

Private IPs should not be publicly routable. For one, you are no longer standards-compliant. If you want to depend on the IPv4 standard, you've already broken what you're trying to depend on.

[ Parent | on HN ]