ietf-asrg
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [Asrg] seeking comments on new RMX article

2003-05-06 13:48:35
It introduces the possibility for "additional" mis-configuration, as does RMX. 
 The point is that an IP address, I think, SHOULD have only one canonical name.

-e

On Tuesday, May 06, 2003 2:43 PM, Vernon Schryver 
[SMTP:vjs(_at_)calcite(_dot_)rhyolite(_dot_)com] wrote:
From: "Eric D. Williams" <eric(_at_)infobro(_dot_)com>

I stand corrected.  I do not see that as a best practice (esp. related to
secure configuration of an IP).

I don't understand the second sentence.  How is a system's security
affected by having more than one PTR RRs for an IP address?

I would agree that because many applications and support tools don't
understand multiple PTR RRs per IP address, it would be unwise to
build a large scale protocol or application that depends on them being
widely supported immediately.


Vernon Schryver    vjs(_at_)rhyolite(_dot_)com
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg