unapporved update

[Barry Finkel]

Cricket wrote:
>That's just plain wrong.  SRV records have been supported in BIND since
>4.9.5.  I have several customers using Windows 2000 clients and DCs with
>BIND.
Cricket wrote:
>What on Earth are you talking about?  As I said, BIND has supported SRV
>records and RFC 2052 since 4.9.5, and as Michael said, the AIC/Cisco product
>supports it, too.  You been reading this stuff off the side of Microsoft
>cereal boxes or what?

I did not see your first reply until I read the digests today; I sent
my reply in response to a reply that was sent to the list and to me.

I got the impression that BIND did not support 2052 because

     1) 2052 (before 2052bis) was labeled as "experimental" and

     2) I had seen no mention in any BIND documentation that 2052
        was supported.

Is there a list of RFCs implemented in BIND?

Michael Vought wrote:
> But if it is NOT specifying a zone for the CNAME check, then it is
> WRONG.

I believe that it IS specifying a zone name for the CNAME check; I
did not include the fully qualified name in my summary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Barry S. Finkel
Electronics and Computing Technologies Division
Argonne National Laboratory          Phone:    +1 (630) 252-7277
9700 South Cass Avenue               Facsimile:+1 (630) 252-9689
Building 221, Room B236              Internet: BSFinkel at anl.gov
Argonne, IL   60439-4844             IBMMAIL:  I1004994