Looking for RFC

[Kevin Darcy]

Be that as it may, a machine can have a "hostname" without being connected to
*any* network. Or I could give a "hostname" to my dog. I'm just trying to point
out that there are limits to what the RFC's can reasonably cover. For instance,
we still have a few SNA-only networks, and the admins probably don't know -- or
need to know -- what "RFC" even stands for. (Not that I'm any kind of fan of
SNA, mind you).


- Kevin

Jeff Younker wrote:

> Whether or not you are connected to "The Internet" is of little consequence.
> If you have more than one physical or logical network then you are operating
> "an internet".  The RFC's are intended to provide specifications that
> facilitate the construction of internets using equipment and software from
> different vendors and authors.  Without a common set of standards this would
> be a much harder task than it already is.
>
> - Jeff Younker - jeff at mdli.com - These are my opinions, not MDL's -
>
>         -----Original Message-----
>         From:   Kevin Darcy [SMTP:kcd at daimlerchrysler.com]
>         Sent:   Thursday, January 06, 2000 12:28 PM
>         To:     comp-protocols-dns-bind at moderators.uu.net
>         Subject:        Re: Looking for RFC
>
>         Barry Margolin wrote:
>
>         > In article <3873E9C5.6799F0CC at daimlerchrysler.com>,
>         > Kevin Darcy  <kcd at daimlerchrysler.com> wrote:
>         > If you're using DNS to store an A record, you're presumed to be
> following
>         > the Internet protocols, even if you're just on a private internet.
> So BIND
>         > will enforce the RFC's rules.
>
>         Granted, this is a BIND list, but my particular clarification was
> about the
>         relationship between OS concepts ("hostname") and RFC's, rather than
> between
>         BIND and RFC's. My basic point was, if I want to call my machine
>         "-@(%AE(*A``SDFN", then the RFC's don't have squat to say about it
> as long as
>         I don't advertise that name in the Internet DNS.
>
>         Whether BIND should be in the business of trying to enforce RFC's in
> a
>         non-Internet context, is a whole other can of worms. Since the vast
> majority of
>         DNS names and DNS servers I maintain are *not* on the Internet, it
> seems rather
>         silly to me personally -- the tail wagging the dog. But then it may
> make more
>         sense from the perspective of an Internet/Network Service Provider
> who deals
>         almost exclusively with Internet DNS...