check-names fail

[Mark.Andrews at nominum.com]

> 
> OK.
> Now, that I have a handle on the blanks-in-name issue,
> I've run into a small issue of behavior difference between
> 8.2.2 and 8.2.3T9B.
> 
> With
> 
>     check-names master fail;
> 
> both 8.2.2-p5 and p7, simply reject an offending record and
> continue to load the zone and answer non-authoritatively for the
> rest of the names.
> 8.2.3T9B, however, rejects the entire zone!!
> 
> Which is the correct behavior?
> 

	Reject the entire zone.  This is required by RFC 103[45].
	It also gets around the attitude of "I'll just ignore the error"
	which causes other problems.

	Mark

> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------
> Tks        | <mailto:BVance at sbm.com>
> BV         | <mailto:BobVance at alumni.caltech.edu>
> Sr. Technical Consultant,  SBM, A Gates/Arrow Co.
> Vox 770-623-3430           11455 Lakefield Dr.
> Fax 770-623-3429           Duluth, GA 30097-1511
> =================================================
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
--
Mark Andrews, Nominum Inc.
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: Mark.Andrews at nominum.com