On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 11:18 -0400, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > I've taken a while to digest it for a more thorough response but really only > found one issue with the fundamental differences between our approaches. > > > b) I look for elements of the IP address in the domain (or, in the > > sub-domain in your case). > > I would recommend against this because large vendors like > MCI/WorldComm/Verizon have gone with this naming scheme for business static > users: > > static-70-21-118-207.res.east.verizon.net.
SBC/SWBell does this this as well. My home network is asdl-1-2-3-4.dsl.ltrkar.swbell.net. whee! -- Stephen L Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unix Systems Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] Department of Information Systems Phone: 501-682-4339 State of Arkansas _______________________________________________ NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above message, it is NULL AND VOID. You may ignore it. Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.roaringpenguin.com MIMEDefang mailing list [email protected] http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
