With respect to rDNS, my practice has been to establish only a single canonical
name to that addresses reverse map. I do not see a need to attach more than
one name. I don't disagree that an IP may have multiple forward maps to
accommodate 'web-hosting' but to me reverse maps have little or nothing to do
with web hosts. I see utility for rDNS where protocols attempting to validate
a presented name e.g. myhost.home.net is the expected name at the reverse map,
i.e.. using ssh, ftp, telnet or smtp. MTAs SHOULD have and use only a
canonical name and not an alias, I feel that it is equally appropriate for the
reverse map of an MTA host.
That's my bugaboo, like I said it is a preference, I thought was a best
practice as well. Although obviously it is not a 'rule' of any sort. Were I
serving domains in the fashion you present I would most likely have a different
view as well.
-e
On Tuesday, May 06, 2003 5:15 PM, Bob Atkinson
[SMTP:bobatk(_at_)Exchange(_dot_)Microsoft(_dot_)com] wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of
Eric D.
Williams
Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2003 1:34 PM
To: 'Vernon Schryver'; asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: [Asrg] seeking comments on new RMX article
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.
I find this odd: IP addresses with which I am familiar routinely have
many names that resolve to the address: they serve many web domains, for
example, or send and receive mail on behalf of several domains. I don't
understand which of these several domains could reasonably be considered
more equal than others and thus the ONE such canonical name.
Bob
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg