Hello,

Keep having this idea pop in my head.. maybe a solution in search of a problem.. DNS servers often have text strings with all sorts of stuff.. spf for ips allowed to send mail on behalf of a domain, domain ownership verfification.. yadda yadda

Could perhaps throw one in there like BBS=2323 or something so syncterm can find nonstandard ports on it's own.

<ted talk joke>

Alex

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (Windows/32)
* Origin: cold fusion - cfbbs.net - grand rapids, mi

Re: syncterm bbs port discovery
By: fusion to Digital Man on Thu Jul 07 2022 05:55 am

Keep having this idea pop in my head.. maybe a solution in search of a problem.. DNS servers often have text strings with all
sorts of stuff.. spf for ips allowed to send mail on behalf of a domain, domain ownership verfification.. yadda yadda

Could perhaps throw one in there like BBS=2323 or something so syncterm can find nonstandard ports on it's own.

So "SRV" records a really for this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRV_record

But your idea is good - could Syncterm read them? Best to find deuce in IRC or post a feature request on sourceforge


...ëîåï

---
þ Synchronet þ Alterant | an SBBS in Docker on Pi!

Re: syncterm bbs port discovery
By: deon to fusion on Thu Jul 07 2022 10:02 pm

Hey Apam,

Keep having this idea pop in my head.. maybe a solution in search of a problem.. DNS servers often have text strings with all
sorts of stuff.. spf for ips allowed to send mail on behalf of a domain, domain ownership verfification.. yadda yadda

Could perhaps throw one in there like BBS=2323 or something so syncterm can find nonstandard ports on it's own.

So "SRV" records a really for this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRV_record

But your idea is good - could Syncterm read them? Best to find deuce in IRC or post a feature request on sourceforge

This would be a nice idea for MagiTerm too...


...ëîåï

---
þ Synchronet þ Alterant | an SBBS in Docker on Pi!

On 7/6/22 22:55, fusion wrote:

Keep having this idea pop in my head.. maybe a solution in search of
a problem.. DNS servers often have text strings with all sorts of
stuff.. spf for ips allowed to send mail on behalf of a domain, domain ownership verfification.. yadda yadda

Could perhaps throw one in there like BBS=2323 or something so
syncterm can find nonstandard ports on it's own.

You could create an SRV record...

_telnet._tcp.foo.com 86400 IN SRV 10 5 2323 host.foo.com

https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/dns/dns-records/dns-srv-record/

However, it's on the client to actually support this... Might be
interesting if web browsers supported this as well, to work around port blocking restrictions without having to specify a given port.

Also, an interesting thing to possibly add to a dyndns service/host for
BBS usage.

DM?
--
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1@roughneckbbs.com

On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 22:02:35 +1000
"deon" <deon@VERT/ALTERANT> wrote:

Re: syncterm bbs port discovery
By: fusion to Digital Man on Thu Jul 07 2022 05:55 am

Keep having this idea pop in my head.. maybe a solution in search
of a problem.. DNS servers often have text strings with all sorts
of stuff.. spf for ips allowed to send mail on behalf of a domain,
domain ownership verfification.. yadda yadda

Could perhaps throw one in there like BBS=2323 or something so
syncterm can find nonstandard ports on it's own.

So "SRV" records a really for this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRV_record

Keep in mind an SRV record hostname must point to a servers A or AAAA
address and not a CNAME. Otherwise, seems reasonable.
--
End Of The Line BBS - Plano, TX
telnet endofthelinebbs.com 23
---
þ Synchronet þ End Of The Line BBS - endofthelinebbs.com

Re: Re: syncterm bbs port discovery
By: Tracker1 to fusion on Thu Jul 07 2022 03:34 pm

On 7/6/22 22:55, fusion wrote:

Keep having this idea pop in my head.. maybe a solution in search of
a problem.. DNS servers often have text strings with all sorts of
stuff.. spf for ips allowed to send mail on behalf of a domain, domain ownership verfification.. yadda yadda

Could perhaps throw one in there like BBS=2323 or something so
syncterm can find nonstandard ports on it's own.

You could create an SRV record...

_telnet._tcp.foo.com 86400 IN SRV 10 5 2323 host.foo.com

https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/dns/dns-records/dns-srv-record/

However, it's on the client to actually support this... Might be interesting if web browsers supported this as well, to work around port blocking restrictions without having to specify a given port.

Also, an interesting thing to possibly add to a dyndns service/host for
BBS usage.

DM?

Yeah, wouldn't be too hard to to the dyndns service. I just don't know of any BBS clients that would make use of it (yet).
--
digital man (rob)

Breaking Bad quote #46:
If I ever get anal polyps, at least I know what to name them. - Saul Goodman Norco, CA WX: 78.3øF, 58.0% humidity, 1 mph ESE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs ---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Nelgin wrote to All <=-

Keep in mind an SRV record hostname must point to a servers A or AAAA address and not a CNAME. Otherwise, seems reasonable.

My experience setting up DNS is long in the past, Bind 4.9 in 1993?

I don't recall if there was any downside to setting multiple A records pointing to one IP, versus one A record with multiple CNAME records pointing to it?

No downside, aside from having to change multiple DNS entries when the originating IP changes?



... What does this mean?
--- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
þ Synchronet þ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.

On 7/9/22 09:02, poindexter FORTRAN wrote:

Keep in mind an SRV record hostname must point to a servers A or
AAAA address and not a CNAME. Otherwise, seems reasonable.

My experience setting up DNS is long in the past, Bind 4.9 in 1993?

I don't recall if there was any downside to setting multiple A records pointing to one IP, versus one A record with multiple CNAME records
pointing to it?

No downside, aside from having to change multiple DNS entries when the originating IP changes?

You can pretty safely have longer lifetimes for CNAME than you'd want to
use for A records. I generally set CNAME for at least a week, and A
records for 15m to a day.

Depending on the DNS server, the round-trip for two requests could
impact things. If you care about the time to render a website, it can
matter a lot. Don't know if it's changed, but GoDaddy's DNS servers had particularly bad latency for most people, and handled a high portion of
the internet. Which is a large part of why google created their
distributed DNS that sometimes exceeds the specified timing in favor of
cached results. Going under 15m for A record likely will be ignored by Google's DNS cache.

It's not too hard to do your own caching DNS lookups. I use pihole
locally and fall back to the Cloudflare DNS servers, I have less trust
of Google over time even though a lot of my domains have DNS at Google,
I like their registrar interface, but considering moving them all.
--
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1@roughneckbbs.com