To:
Dean Anderson <dean@av8.com>
Cc:
Rob Austein <sra+dnsop@hactrn.net>, <dnsop@cafax.se>
From:
JINMEI Tatuya / $B?@L@C#:H(B
<jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp>
Date:
Wed, 09 Apr 2003 23:34:55 +0900
In-Reply-To:
<Pine.LNX.4.44.0304041608420.19441-100000@commander.av8.net>
Sender:
owner-dnsop@cafax.se
User-Agent:
Wanderlust/2.10.0 (Venus) Emacs/21.2 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
Subject:
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dnsop-inaddr-required-04.txt
>>>>> On Fri, 4 Apr 2003 16:50:57 -0500 (EST), >>>>> Dean Anderson <dean@av8.com> said: > I think you are misunderstanding the draft. (snip) >> 2. applications should not rely on reverse mapping for several >> purposes as they currently do. The discouraged purposes include: >> - rejecting ftp/telnet connections just due to the lack of reverse >> mapping or failure of reverse-forward-reverse match. >> - filtering rule in TCP wrappers due to the lack of reverse mapping >> - regarding e-mail messages as spam if the sender address does not >> have a reverse mapping > This is where you misunderstand. Although it seems contradictory to some > of the other language in the draft, the proponents don't think these are > inappropriate uses. The idea is to make everyone else change their usage > of reverse so that these kinds of uses won't deny large numbers regular, > ordinary users, as is the case now. I won't be surprised if I misunderstand the intention, and, in fact, your understanding and mine are different. So, I'd first like to hear from the author about the intention. Then we can go back to Rob's original question. JINMEI, Tatuya Communication Platform Lab. Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp. jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp #---------------------------------------------------------------------- # To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>.