Steve Atkins wrote:
On Jun 7, 2007, at 1:34 AM, Hector Santos wrote:
>
The single DNS query syntax would be:
a.b.c.d.e.f.g.h.i.j.k._ssp.foo
The result will depend on what this organization is going to define
for policies at each level.
No. You're simply displaying a lack of understanding of DNS.
Why not? and How so?
There is no conceivable way that can work in general.
By your reasoning, if presented with the hostname
sales.demon.co.uk you would query for sales.demon.co._ssp.uk.
That won't work. At all.
Why not?
Please, before making assertions about how DNS resolution
should work, think about the basics of how DNS actually works.
Fair enough, and I am going to make a greater serious effort to study,
explore BIND source code, to see exactly how it all works. There is
probably some truth that BIND should be a good candidate in your eyes,
correct? It won't take me long since I already written DNS client code
and understand client operations inside and out.
That said. Give me some credit for trying. You didn't even try to
understand the resolution yourself. You are saying it is WRONG. I don't
see why. Maybe you should explain if you know and rather then shoot it
down, explain your NO and why it will not work.
What I don't know for sure and I will find out is the server side lookup
overhead issue.
Now, from what I am sensing here is that for a domain such as:
sales.demon.co.uk
the zone file is based on what?
demon.co.uk?
co.uk?
uk?
Is it a HARD CORE RULE either way? Do you know? If so, explain it.
I see no problem with the resolution for our set of domains. It resolves
perfectly and its PDQ. I don't have subdomains at 10 levels and I
seriously DOUBT many systems do. But sure, it should work the same.
Unrealistic and even then, low occurrences, but still, it should work
the same.
--
Sincerely
Hector Santos, CTO
http://www.santronics.com
http://santronics.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html