Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: Fw: [NTBUGTRAQ] Win 2003 DNS requests makes replies over 512 byte PIX limit


From: "hggdh" <hggdh () attbi com>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 16:51:50 -0500

I am sorry I did not explain myself here -- my fault. Apologies to Mathias,
Peter, and Ron.

Indeed almost all name server in use will use TCP for larger replies. They
probably did not get any responses because, as a lot of people out there,
they only allow UDP for DNS.

But Windows 2003 implements EDNS0 (RFC2671), which allows for UDP payloads
larger than 512 bytes...

The actual point/thing I am curious about is on the WIndows 2003 DNS
behaviour (I cannot test it right now) -- why would it start requesting a
truckload of info (as compared to WIndows 2000 DNS)?

In fact, WHAT is it it is requesting?

I plan on setting a 2003 test box as a name server, and I will look at it;
but, with people jumping in W2003, and using it as their name server, this
might become a hurdle.

Cheers,

..hggdh..


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mathias Gerber" <mathias () intergga ch>
To: <full-disclosure () lists netsys com>
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2003 15:36
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Fw: [NTBUGTRAQ] Win 2003 DNS requests makes
replies over 512 byte PIX limit


Hello hggdh,
On Thu, 8 May 2003 12:09:22 -0500 you wrote:
FYI. Any ideas?
We are running the latest version (6.3.1) on our Cisco PIX and it
appears that there is hard limit of 512 bytes on ANY UDP packets
arriving on port 53.  Everything exceeding that is dropped.
AFAIK the DNS uses TCP for larger replys.
-- 
mathias
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


Current thread: