|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: IP address fee??
At 3:40 PM +0200 2002/09/06, Peter van Dijk wrote: Technically, you are correct. However, this issue is as much about how the DNS has been used historically, and general agreed-upon principles by which the DNS should be used, as it is about how do you technically serve that information.in-addr.arpa is not special from a DNS point-of-view. If you have a nail and a hammer, there are ways of using the hammer to hit the nail that will be less productive than others (in terms of nailing some object to another). If you choose to lay the nail flat on the top object and hit the side of the nail with the hammer, you're welcome to do so. However, if you do this, don't be surprised when it doesn't stick to second object very well. Moreover, don't come complaining to me, or anyone else, who told you that this was stupid thing to do. For the most part, we only care about mis-uses and abuses of technical tools (like the DNS) to the degree that we can modify future versions of the programs that serve these protocols to refuse to function in this manner, thus preventing people from accidentally (or otherwise) doing these kinds of incredibly stupid things.Bizarre. Truly bizarre. Somehow, I feel compelled to make some remark about "perverting the course of the DNS", or somesuch.What am I doing wrong in this case? A zone is delegated, the nameserver receiving the delegation serves this zone. No apexes mismatch. -- Brad Knowles, <[email protected]> "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania. GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++)>: a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI++++$ P+>++ L+ !E W+++(--) N+ !w--- O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP>+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++) tv+(+++) b+(++++) DI+(++++) D+(++) G+(++++) e++>++++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++)
|