>>And for spam domains, IP-jumping is common...
>>...for well run, legitimate domains, what
>>you say is indeed correct
>Overall, I think you actually make the case FOR my idea of artifically long
>cacheing of rDNS checks. And, I think my earlier messages covered the various
>scenarios.
>
>>the load on the hypothetical "pre-mapped rDNS" server would be extreme.
>Probably the best point so far against my idea
>
>>Are you certain that you checked using a
>>different server that was not authoritative;
>>Otherwise the test was invalid and needs to be redone.
>Should I put a "dunce cap on" now... turns out that what you describe is
>exactly that happened. But, since then, I've gotten some mixed results...
>
>Rob McEwen
>PowerView Systems
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>(478) 475-9032
>
Rob,
Certainly not (no dunce cap). Public airing of ideas generally
has merit - quite possibly this idea can be refined to something similar
that will provide a benefit (I admit, I have not given it a lot of thought).
Paul Shupak
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
