Personally I see absolutely no harm in a (BCP) RFC saying "do this",
regardless of available "enforcement mechanisms".
Some people understand the reasons that you want described; they
already run .in-addr.arpa NSs. Other don't, but would not care to
read anyway. For some of those it would help to simply have an RFC
to point to - "please read RFCxyz.txt".
So, if for nothing else please move this draft forward.
Gunnar Lindberg
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Aug 13 09:02:40 2000
>From: Robert Elz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: wrt: draft-ietf-dnsop-inaddr-required-00.txt
>Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 16:54:12 +1000
>Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sorry people, this draft is a total waste of time.
>I'm an absolute supporter of properly running in-addr.arpa domains,
>and if someone wanted to write an RFC to explain to people what they're
>useful for, and why the data needs to be maintained, that would be fine.
>But to pretend to make it a requirement (on anyone) to maintain the
>things is just silly.
> ...
