fixing insecure email infrastructure (was: Re: [eweek article]

Fri Jan 14 06:30:22 UTC 2005

That's bad sincd DNAME is deprecated and has been removed from BIND.

Owen

--On Friday, January 14, 2005 10:05 +1100 Mark Andrews 
<Mark_Andrews at isc.org> wrote:

>
>> What is wrong with MTAMARK?
>
> 	As currently described it doesn't fit well with RFC 2317
> 	style delegations.  They would need to be converted to use
> 	DNAME instead of CNAME which requires all the delegating
> 	servers to be upgraded to support DNAME.
>
> 	There are other issues but hear is not the correct place
> 	to debate them.

-- 
If this message was not signed with gpg key 0FE2AA3D, it's probably
a forgery.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20050113/045e35dc/attachment.sig>