> ok .ok. ok (I was about to say something else, but I think think I
> figured out where I was wrong in my previous post). Instead of saying
> "lame servers are sorta like the mail that you receive at your new
> home that are addressed to the previous home owner" would it be
> correct to say "lame servers are like the junk-mailers that have the
> wrong name on file for who lives at your new house (after all, it's
> the mailer that has the name on file, not the post office)?" From the
> perspective of Carlos and HIS server, someone out there thinks that
> his server has authority - but isn't - and since he doesn't, and it's
> someone else's misconfiguration, he can just ignore it (or send the
> logs to null). Or is this BACKWARDS? I've thought that a line in the
> log like what the OP was concerned about meant that MY server was
> asked directions, but are you saying that my server is the one doing
> the asking (and then so noting the lame server)?
> Mike

You server is doing the asking and then so noting the remote
lame server.


Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews@isc.org