On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 05:18:55PM -0500, John Wobus wrote: > Short of a clear RFC statement, it hardly seems to be BIND9's fault, > though it would be great if BIND9 went beyond compliance to help defend > against such situations. But I'm not sure what form such a defense Note that it now does - you just need one of the most recent versions... -- Phil Dibowitz Systems Architect and Administrator Enterprise Infrastructure / ISD / USC UCC 174 - 213-821-5427 -- Attached file included as plaintext by Ecartis -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCN2wl7lkZ1Iyv898RAhp8AJ9XPN40H7VTDsYRZZisADCSccMB+wCgp6na Z1pyrqThuLdj+VT1hNrN7WY= =R2HZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----