Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
the KISS approximation would be to ignore PTR completely for
DNS limiting purposes as Wayne suggested. A decent model of
the lazy validation PTR algorithm would be to count 1 for the
first PTR, plus 1 for each ptr match.
Maybe two for the first ptr would be "fair", but then we'd need
11/10/10 instead of 10/10/10 for strictly backwards compatible
processing limits => ordre-contreordre-desordre, IMHO that's a
bad idea.
For similar reasons "count only the first" is not much better,
that leaves only what Richard, Wayne, and you said, remove ptr
from the list of counted mechanisms - and then hope that all
implementors will read the final RfC, sigh.
So that could be another point for Wayne's AUTH48: fix ABNF
for CIDR (1), fix ptr limit (2), remove mismatch PermError (3),
anything else ?
Bye, Frank