I do not believe it is either necessary or appropriate to have DNS
provide only addresses that are reachable by the party making the query.
The question in my mind is whether it is appropriate to put addresses
that are by design not globally reachable in the DNS.
Nor should DNS be used as a
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 09:10:08 +0100 (CET)
Erik Nordmark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I do not believe it is either necessary or appropriate to have DNS
provide only addresses that are reachable by the party making the query.
The question in my mind is whether it is appropriate to put
But when server.example.com has that is just GUPI then mail
delivery to [EMAIL PROTECTED] will fail when the GUPI is not reachable,
right?
Yes it will. But not because you listed a GUPI in the DNS, but because you
failed to provide and advertise a server that was reachable by
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 20:09:41 +0100 (CET)
Erik Nordmark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But when server.example.com has that is just GUPI then mail
delivery to [EMAIL PROTECTED] will fail when the GUPI is not
reachable, right?
Yes it will. But not because you listed a GUPI in the DNS,
One thing I haven't seen discussed in the GUPI/GUSL threads is
how folks envision they and DNS to fit together for the lookups
especially when GUPI is used for private interconnects between sites
(whether it is site-to-site or goes through some ISPs through private
arrangements).
I do
Erik Nordmark wrote:
But the private interconnects seem to imply that there needs to
be more than two faces - one for each set of set of sites that
use GUPI/GUSL for private interconnects I think.
Yes.
Has anybody thought through how this would work? With recursive
resolvers?
No. With an
