[PLUG] What a mess... No reverse record for this PCC site...

[Stafford A. Rau]

* Michael C. Robinson <michael at goose.robinson-west.com> [031001 10:59]:
> On Tue, 2003-09-30 at 23:32, Russell Senior wrote:
> > 
> > This reminds me of RFC 3514[1].  Once that is more widely implemented,
> > I think all our problems will go away.
> > 
> > [1] <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3514.txt>
> > 
> It talks about an evil bit which essentially seems to suggest
> a packet be labeled as to it's intent.  Considering that any
> protocol can be run through any port if I'm not mistaken, isn't
> the API to label packets as friendly or evil going to be hard
> to implement?

RFC 3514 was meant to be a joke. Laugh.

> One oddity with monster.com is that their reverse record is to
> a different name than their A record is from.  I can resolve 
> monster.com to a number where that number resolves to a
> different name.  Is this a correct configuration?  Why would 
> someone set up their dns this way?

This is normal - consider hosting multiple email/web/whatever domains on
a single host with a single ip address. Many many different dns A
records can point to the same IP address, but a reverse or PTR record
for an IP can only return one host name.

--Stafford