On Sun, 2007-06-03 at 08:58 -0700, Steve Atkins wrote: > (Still way OT, but it's more interesting than SSP, eh?) > > > IMO it's a really odd idea as it causes DNS root queries by standards > > compliant MTAs and changes the semantics of MX (now all of a sudden MX > > relates to sending mail). > > No, it shouldn't cause root queries.
Paul Vixie was fairly convincing in explaining why this construct caused significant trouble when used with SRV RRs for indicating "No Service". The SRV draft even documents the meaning of the "." construct from inception. Still, software must exclude interpreting this as a valid host. When seen as a valid host too often, this construct can not be safely used, even when initially defined as "No Target." For the MX record, this field is defined as a valid host. Use of this construct would be expecting software to have the foresight to exclude ".". Yahoo gets a fair number of queries for "http://www.yahoo.com"; A IN records which was fixed with a cname. Ignorant software is everywhere, why expect otherwise? -Doug _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
