Re: noid and applications (generic requirements from applications)

[Brian E Carpenter <brc@zurich.ibm.com>]

Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> 
> On 13-nov-03, at 16:26, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> 
> > Doesn't this objection also apply to passing an FQDN around,
> > since FQDNs can also be unreachable, due to 2-faced DNS
> > and the like?
> 
> What would be the logic of making something unreachable using twofaced
> DNS? I thought the point was to make sure that different people connect
> to different hosts when they try to connect to an FQDN. The situation
> where one side of the DNS produces something useful while the other
> doesn't is either unintended, which is the risk you run by abusing
> technology in this way, or is intended in which case there isn't a
> problem.

I don't mean there would be any logic. My point is that just as
you can make a mess by referring unrouteable addresses, you can make
a mess by referring inaccessible FQDNs.

If server.example.com sends a referral for internal-only.example.com 
to client.example.org, it is no different from sending a referral to 
FEC0::27. Neither referral makes sense, but both might happen if 
server.example.com doesn't know any better.

   Brian