On Thu, 24 Apr 2003 11:00:17 EDT, Eric Rosen said: > transparency.) The fact that A gives B an address of C rather than a name > of C doesn't seem relevant at all; after all, names just resolve to > addresses; I think the name vs. address issue is a red herring in this > context. I'm not at ALL convinced it's a red herring in the least. In fact, it may be relevant that it uses an address rather than the name of C, because it's certainly conceivable that A gives B a name which *when resolved by B* results in something that can get to C. One example: Akamai DNS... (OK, all you 'The DNS must be consistent' fanatics can shoot me now ;)
Attachment:
pgp00219.pgp
Description: PGP signature