[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Doug Barton) writes: > ... I took this a step further and worked (together with others) on a > patch to restrict the size of DNS answers to < 512 by returning a random > selection of any RR set larger than that.
note that this sounds like a DNS protocol violation, and usually is. every time someone sent me a BIND patch adding this kind of deliberate instability (see RFC 1794 for an example) i said "no". -- Paul Vixie
