In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kent Crispin writes:
> On Sun, May 09, 1999 at 09:04:13AM -0400, A.M. Rutkowski wrote:
> > At 05:08 AM 5/9/99 , Dr Eberhard W Lisse wrote:
> > >Nonsense. The Zone file is all required to operate the DNS. And if you
> > >need to contact the person responsible for an entry you email the
> > >address listed in the SOA.
> >
> > A much more granular and extensive way of providing
> > this information is found in RFC1183. Indeed, the
> > Digital Millennium Copyright Act provides an incentive.
> > See http://www.ngi.org/pub/copyright.htm
OK, let's just see what FRC 1183 has to say:
2. Responsible Person
The purpose of this section is to provide a standard method for
associating responsible person identification to any name in the DNS.
The domain name system functions as a distributed database which
contains many different form of information. For a particular name
or host, you can discover it's Internet address, mail forwarding
information, hardware type and operating system among others.
A key aspect of the DNS is that the tree-structured namespace can be
divided into pieces, called zones, for purposes of distributing
control and responsibility. The responsible person for zone database
purposes is named in the SOA RR for that zone. This section
describes an extension which allows different responsible persons to
be specified for different names in a zone.
2.1. Identification of the guilty party
Often it is desirable to be able to identify the responsible entity
for a particular host. When that host is down or malfunctioning, it
is difficult to contact those parties which might resolve or repair
the host. Mail sent to POSTMASTER may not reach the person in a
timely fashion. If the host is one of a multitude of workstations,
there may be no responsible person which can be contacted on that
host.
The POSTMASTER mailbox on that host continues to be a good contact
point for mail problems, and the zone contact in the SOA record for
database problem, but the RP record allows us to associate a mailbox
to entities that don't receive mail or are not directly connected
(namespace-wise) to the problem (e.g., GATEWAY.ISI.EDU might want to
point at [EMAIL PROTECTED], and GATEWAY doesn't get mail, nor does the
ISI zone administrator have a clue about fixing gateways).
So, what I have been saying, that in order to contact the Domain
Manager you use the SOA record, is correct.
The RP is optional and pertains to the indvidual hosts in any case.
> Apparently not much of an incentive. Checking some domains at
> random, neither netmagic.com or chaos.com show RP records.
chaos.com has an SOA entry of hostmaster.psi.com, which is quite
accepteable to me.
> Of course, it's not clear how the DMCA would affect linix.lisse.na,
> anyway, but there are no RP records there, either.
It's linux.lisse.na not linux.lisse.na.
And, the mailbox in the SOA record is el.linux.lisse.na
And, if you read my posts you'd see that I had commented on the RP
issue (old named's and the Microsnot garbage coughing on it).
But, alas, I have added this (redundant) information.
el
