I was setting up tests involving DNS resolution recently, where something like 127.0.0.1.service.foo would have been tremendously useful. Back in the day, I'd have used xip.io - but sadly that service died.<p>Well, every excuse is a good one when it comes to writing a DNS server! Backname.io joins nip.io and sslip.io in the wildcard DNS game.
Nice. I've seen other usecases for this.<p>Accessing an IPv4 address on a IPv6-only network with NAT64/DNS64 is only possible if you access that IPv4 via a DNS name that resolves to the IPv4 address. DNS64 will turn your A record into an AAAA record, with the IPv4 address mapped to a v6 addrsss that the NAT64 layer knows how to "undo".<p>I've seen others need this a few times in practice.
The problem is someone ends up using one of these in production. Then backname.io becomes an attractive target.<p>It would be cool to have it as a locally installed custom DNS resolver on the developers computer though.
I'm failing to see the utility of this if I still have to type the IP address. Also, it fails using local address like 192-168-1-1.backname.io where it might be usefull somehow, so, please explain. Thanks.
xip.io was indeed useful. nip.io seems to still work.<p>Isn't the main useful aspect that you can do xyz.1.2.3.4.backname.io where xyz is anything you want? Perhaps you set this up anyway, but would be worth mentioning.
There is also <a href="http://traefik.me/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://traefik.me/</a><p>There is <a href="https://ipq.co/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://ipq.co/</a> and <a href="https://fdns.uk/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://fdns.uk/</a> that will let you create a name to point to a chosen ip.
<a href="https://github.com/ncruces/keyless">https://github.com/ncruces/keyless</a> was my attempt to provide you with the necessary tools to build your own service that would not only:<p><pre><code> - give you a domain for any IP (even local IPs);
- give you SSL on that domain (even local IPs!);
- abide by Let's Encrypt terms.</code></pre>
I can think of at least four reasons and security concerns not to use a service like this:<p>- Exposing a potentially private IP to an external service<p>- If testing local IPs, adds a requirement for an internet connection<p>- Must trust that it will always resolve to the actual IP not another one<p>- Requires your service to accept a hostname that it likely shouldn't
Just by looking at the handler, it is not RFC compliant. I do not see SOA record being generated properly nor do I see a proper handling of nxdomain vs nodatae responses.<p>See RFC 2308.
> 127-0-0-1.backname.io resolves to 127.0.0.1<p>Is this enough to fool Edge (Windows 10) into allowing you to view your local Apache development environment?