> On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 12:04:49PM +0200, Olaf M. Kolkman wrote:
>
> > But isn't the default as provided by the software vendor. So why not
> > something like rfcXXXX.blafoo.nl (in case blafoo would be the vendor
> > of the resolver) and have a auto-responder behind that address?
>
> My feeling is that this is beyond what we can successfully recommend in a BCP
> .
>
> > fields. So the draft suggests the mname to contain the 'local'
> > administrator (SHOULD) and the vendor puts its own default. (It is
> > unfortunate that such address will become a spam magnet).
>
> It would also be a spam reflector and open a can of worms IMHO.
> I wonder if those people clever enough to dig out the RNAME really
> would need the help of an auto responder. My point about avoiding the "."
> was more to say "." != "no address" (waiting for someone to point me to the
> existing (bad) precedent).
RP.
> -Peter
> .
> dnsop resources:_____________________________________________________
> web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop.html
> mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop/index.html
--
ISC Training! October 16-20, 2006, in the San Francisco Bay Area,
covering topics from DNS to DHCP. Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
.
dnsop resources:_____________________________________________________
web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop.html
mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop/index.html
