I wouldn't assume that BIND would _unconditionally_ reject
non-RFC-6335-compliant names. check-names can be set to warn, fail or
ignore.
- Kevin
On 8/25/2012 2:31 AM, Kevin Oberman wrote:
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 8:38 PM, Kevin Darcy <k...@chrysler.com> wrote:
Fine, the validator would confirm that the SRV's owner name is compliant
with RFC 6335, no more, no less.
You seem to completely ignore the idea of non-standard, locally
defined services, but they really exist and are used. If you insist on
only registered services, BIND will no longer work for those and they
are explicitly allowed by RFC2782 and people expect them to continue
to work. RFC635 clearly states that service names SHOULD be registered
with IANA, but any enterprise using a locally developed and quite
possibly proprietary service is quite unlikely to register it or want
to do so. After all, it would serve no purpose at all, even if the SRV
records were used between enterprise facilities over the wider
Internet.
_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe
from this list
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
