On Thu, Sep 07, 2006 at 12:09:44PM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> > > Local administrators clearly don't do this at the moment
> > > despite being required to do so for the last 10 years
> >
> > really? i've not seen that.
>
> RFC 1918
>
> Indirect references to such addresses should be contained within the
> enterprise. Prominent examples of such references are DNS Resource
> Records and other information referring to internal private
> addresses. In particular, Internet service providers should take
> measures to prevent such leakage.
>
> This covers the reverse prefixes for these address ranges.
noting the distinction btwn "should" and "SHOULD"
they are different in the IETF.
> > that is not particularly true, since i was the one
> > who proposed the creation of the sacrifical servers in
> > the first place.
>
> You mean to say that it wasn't prompted by leaked reverse
> queries for these ranges?
nope. but we have wandered far afield of the call for
support for this draft. I don't support it.
--bill
.
dnsop resources:_____________________________________________________
web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop.html
mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop/index.html
