On 9/11/2014 12:08 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
we both also said it's personal preference.
On 11.09.14 12:53, Kevin Darcy wrote:
And I'm saying that's a cop-out. It should be a recommended practice
encouraging consistent
forward/reverse mappings is something that all DNS admins have a
stake in, whether they realize it or not.
correct reverse-forward mappings - yes.
correct forward-reverse mappings - no.
In zones apexes it's sometimes just impossible and I have already met people
uselessly insisting on such (pardon me) shit without understanding real
(and potentially much bigger) problem.
It's not usable where it's not usable, of course. But, where it *is*
usable, I'm just saying it's recommended,
It's definitely not recommended by me. You are of course free to recommend
what you choose, but I think I should warn you I'll oppose that...
Did you seriously think I'd recommend
something that *doesn't*work*? Please, give me a little more credit
than that.
I remember you from your postings here, so I really don't think you are
incompetent, especially not an idiot :-)
I just don't agree with this point, because I have already met people not
getting this properly and insisting on something that was likely to get them
into troubles bigger than with having multiple A's...
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
- Holmes, what kind of school did you study to be a detective?
- Elementary, Watson. -- Daffy Duck & Porky Pig
_______________________________________________
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
