The latest

Valdis and all,

Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 25 Jun 1997 13:14:19 MDT, Jawaid Bazyar said:
> > At 01:08 PM 6/25/97 +0100, Jeff Williams wrote:
> > >  The relationship is obvious.
> >
> > Other than the fact that a domain name is mapped to an IP address (but
> > could just as easily be mapped to something else..), how are they
> > "irrevocably related"? If this is all you're talking about, please explain
> 
> You almost, but not quite, hit the crux of the matter here.  There's a
> LOT of domains that consist of essentially just an SOA record, some NS
> entries  pointing at an ISP's  nameservers, and a wildcard MX pointing
> at  the  ISP's mail   hub.  So,  as   you put it,  they're  "mapped to
> something else".

  Good point.
> 
> Given the existence of these, the "relationship is obvious" is not quite
> as obviousas Mr Williams would have us believe.  There's machines with
> more than one logical hostname.  There's machines with IP addresses and
> no hostname (consider a PC on a subnet, using an IP address that is not
> in the nameserver, and has no PTR record).

  True.  However this is not a "Normal occurance in this context".
> 
> Noel Chiappa was pushing for the addition of *another* level of indirection
> between DNS names and IP addresses, to be called "endpoints".  I'm almost
> afraid to think what this discussion would look like if he had suceeded...

  Hummmm?  Possibly.  But notnecessarly a "BAD" direction but almost
certianly a diffrent one in some aspects.
> 
> --
>                                 Valdis Kletnieks
>                                 Computer Systems Senior Engineer
>                                 Virginia Tech
> 
>     ---------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>                Part 1.2   Type: application/pgp-signature
Regards,
-- 
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java Development Eng.
Information Eng. Group. IEG. INC. 
Phone :913-294-2375 (v-office)
E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com