*> From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Jun 2 13:09:06 2000 *> Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 15:41:48 -0400 *> From: John C Klensin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> *> Subject: Re: Security and suffixes (Re: Cite on DNS-related traffic.) *> In-reply-to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> *> To: Joe Touch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> *> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *> MIME-version: 1.0 *> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.0.0 (Win32) *> Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit *> Content-disposition: inline *> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit *> X-Loop: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit *> X-Lines: 15 *> *> *> *> --On Friday, June 02, 2000 10:56 AM -0700 Joe Touch *> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: *> *> > The use of the trailing dot (www.netscape.com.) remains *> > a useful way to force the resolver to avoid suffix extensions. *> *> And a useful way to induce massive confusion, since many *> applications do not recognize the hack and won't pass it to a *> resolver (which, of course, may or may not recognize it either). *> *> john *> John, Hack?? I will admit to being largely out of touch with this issue, but I recall the discussions in the IAB while the DNS was under development. Far from being a hack, I believe it was an architectured solution to the problem. It is documented (at least) in section 6.1.4.3 of RFC 1123. Bob Braden
