[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> Personally I see absolutely no harm in a (BCP) RFC saying "do this",
> regardless of available "enforcement mechanisms".
I'm for rev-DNS, but for me to be able to tell others to do it, with a
clear conscience, I need to have a motivation, and that should be a
motivation that I can take to limited-IP-clue-people, and say "this is
why you should have reverse DNS".
With forward DNS I can:
Technician: If your forward DNS doesn't work, people can't get to
your web pages, an cannot shop from your web shop. We would
lose money.
Customer: Oh?! That's bad! Please make sure it works.
But:
Technician: If your reverse DNS doesn't work, my friends on the 'net
cannot help us to solve problems, and it _may_ be that
we have problems reaching one or two ill-configured web
sites out there.
Customer: Who cares?! The 'net works now, and I don't care about
those web sites anyhow.
Help us find and formulate such a motivation, and put it in the
document, and we'll all be happier for ever on! (TM) :-)
If we can't find a _good_ motivation, I see no basis for the document
to become a BCP. The motivation is really the big point here.
Cheers,
/Liman
#----------------------------------------------------------------------
# Lars-Johan Liman, Systems Specialist ! E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# KTH Network Operations Centre ! HTTP : //www.sunet.se/~liman
# Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden ! Voice : Int +46 8 - 790 65 60
#----------------------------------------------------------------------
