Greg Skinner wrote:
> I don't want to go so far as to say that a domain name must map to an
> IP address. That would rule out domain names that map to MX records
> that forward mail to hosts that are not attached to the Internet
> proper, for example. But I do think that the assignment of domain
> names has to be made (at least until there are more TLDs) more
> carefully than it's been.
Ah. I see I overlooked something in your comments to Kent Crispin, and
that my misunderstanding betrays my lack of technical understanding of
the DNS. But I have a copy of "DNS and BIND" here, and after browsing
Chapter 5 ("What's a Mail Exchanger, Again?") the raltionship between IP
numbers, DN's and MX records is starting to sink in.
So I still agree with the spirit of Greg's argument vs. Kent's that the
DNS has been abused, but I see I'll have to find some way to restate my
concept of the importance of mandating that registered names be
connected to online resources.
Craig Simon
