On Jun 7, 2005, at 09:58, Peter Koch wrote:
Name servers are objects in the DNS which are pointed at due to their special function. Just using their names as "aliases" to some address misses the point.
Please explain what point is being missed Peter. The ability to have these "aliases" is valuable. For example, when I renamed the *host* that was the master server for rfc1035.com I didn't have to change the delegation. This pointed at ns0.rfc1035.com which was and is an A record for the zone's master server. Name service for the zone remained at the same IP address but the name of the box providing that service changed.
This confuses me too Ed. AFAICT there is no one name per address policy. Even if this was the case for TLD delegations, we'd still only be talking about wasting around 4000 IPv4 addresses, assuming each TLD
So, why would all this new wisdom only apply to TLDs?
Because that was the initial context of the discussion! There appeared to be a policy at IANA of one hostname per IP address in the root zone. It's clearly unworkable to insist on there being exactly one hostname for an IP address. There should of course be one PTR record per IP address, but that's an entirely different discussion.