On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 13:27, william(at)elan.net wrote: > potentially they could switch > to using different CLASS (i.e. like HESIOD is locally used in MIT) Actually, MIT switched to class IN for Hesiod data years ago because multiple-class support didn't work as well as hoped. With the data in class IN hesiod became a simple overlay over the existing DNS with no mods required to the DNS infrastructure code (resolvers or servers). Note that, in contrast with .gprs, and regardless of which class it used, hesiod data at MIT was always stored in a subzone of mit.edu rather than in an unregistered & uncoordinated TLD. - Bill _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf