also sprach Nathan E Norman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.03.22.2015 +0100]: > Multiple PTR records do not make sense. Every IP address should have > a PTR record; there should be a valid A record which corresponds to a > PTR record. Additional A records are allowed.
This is what I argue, and which seems to echo even Paul Vixie and Dan Bernstein. However, there are strong opposers, and I wouldn't mind hearing your arguments. Multiple PTR records are possible, and apparently there *are* pieces of software that employ these data. My main argument is that it isn't used on a wide scale, so what's the point? > These days testing for a valid PTR record and A record combination is > rather painful as many people seem to get this wrong. That's not an argument, I find. > indicative of "clue" level at the remote end. If you do it correctly > you can make it obvious when someone is using an IP they shouldn't be > using; for all your unassigned IPs set the PTR record to an invalid A > record (like "invalid.isp.net"). Now *this* would violate the RFC, I believe. > As far as I can tell, your setup works. I'm not sure why the remote > has decided to reject your connection. Perhaps you could configure > your MTA to send "debian4.unizh.ch" as the HELO/EHLO argument? I am not going to do jack ;^> -- Please do not CC me when replying to lists; I read them! .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' : proud Debian developer, admin, and user `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system Keyserver problems? http://keyserver.kjsl.com/~jharris/keyserver.html Get my key here: http://madduck.net/me/gpg/publickey
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
