Hostname Naming Compliance
cet1 at cam.ac.uk
Mon Feb 23 19:31:00 UTC 2009
On Feb 23 2009, Evan Hunt wrote:
>On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 01:54:46PM -0500, Eric C. Davis wrote:
>> I know the option to use this compliance checker is present, but I'm
>> curious to know if there are plans to make it mandatory to comply. We
>> aren't using this feature now, but I would like to. My problem is
>> politicking my way around the issue of breaking something that works.
>> If Bind were to say they were going to start forcing compliance with
>> this naming standard, then I simply have to say it's a standard that is
>> being enforced. Shouldn't enforcement be applied across the board
>> anyway instead of at the operator's discretion?
>I haven't heard anyone at ISC suggest this, but if I did, I'd argue
>against it. I don't think we have any wish to be the "enforcers". :)
>And anyway, if we put "mandatory" compliance into BIND, people who
>wanted to break the rule would just hack it back out again.
Or switch to different nameserver software that wasn't so proscriptive.
There's a strong argument that it isn't the job of BIND to be enforcing
restrictions that are not strictly DNS-related (vide RFC 2181 section 11).
The current uneasy compromise, in which there are restrictions that are
meant to be helpful, but which can be turned off, is probably the best
that can be achieved.
Email: cet1 at cam.ac.uk
More information about the bind-users