To:
dnsop@cafax.se, kre@munnari.OZ.AU
From:
Gunnar Lindberg <lindberg@cdg.chalmers.se>
Date:
Tue, 15 Aug 2000 11:39:21 +0200 (MET DST)
In-Reply-To:
<16202.966149652@mundamutti.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
Sender:
owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: wrt: draft-ietf-dnsop-inaddr-required-00.txt
Personally I see absolutely no harm in a (BCP) RFC saying "do this", regardless of available "enforcement mechanisms". Some people understand the reasons that you want described; they already run .in-addr.arpa NSs. Other don't, but would not care to read anyway. For some of those it would help to simply have an RFC to point to - "please read RFCxyz.txt". So, if for nothing else please move this draft forward. Gunnar Lindberg >From owner-dnsop@cafax.se Sun Aug 13 09:02:40 2000 >From: Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU> >To: dnsop@cafax.se >Subject: wrt: draft-ietf-dnsop-inaddr-required-00.txt >Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 16:54:12 +1000 >Message-Id: <16202.966149652@mundamutti.cs.mu.OZ.AU> >Sorry people, this draft is a total waste of time. >I'm an absolute supporter of properly running in-addr.arpa domains, >and if someone wanted to write an RFC to explain to people what they're >useful for, and why the data needs to be maintained, that would be fine. >But to pretend to make it a requirement (on anyone) to maintain the >things is just silly. > ...