[Imap-use] UW's DNS-based approach vs. perdition/proxies

[Jeroen van Aart]

Mark Crispin wrote:

> That document is Informational, meaning that it does not carry the 

> weight of a specification (which would be standards-track: Proposed 

> Standard, Draft Standard, Full Standard).


I understand, and it is obsoleted by http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1912, 
which appears to also suggest a low TTL to not be a good idea. Even if 
no "authorative" rfc suggests a TTL of less than say 1 day is a bad 
idea, I would think that current bad practices of certain name servers 
can make it problematic to depend on low TTLs.


> such as UW's deskmail domain.  Nor does this document claim to take such 

> special-purpose domains into account; much less establish a requirement 


I was wondering how deskmail deals with this. Are users being told to 
use  that specific nameserver, as the primary one in their dns 
configuration? I guess that would avoid this problem but may add an 
extra level of confusion, seeing it's hard enough as it is to explain 
how to configure an email client. Let alone the name servers in 
someone's network configuration.

Regards,
Jeroen