Robert Elz <> Wed, 04 January 1995 03:38 UTC

Received: from by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa12058; 3 Jan 95 22:38 EST
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa12054; 3 Jan 95 22:38 EST
Received: from by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa28171; 3 Jan 95 22:38 EST
Received: from munnari.OZ.AU by (5.65c/5.61+local-20) id <AA12357>; Tue, 3 Jan 1995 19:19:39 -0800
Received: from by with SMTP (5.83--+1.3.1+0.50) id AA12455; Wed, 4 Jan 1995 14:19:29 +1100 (from kre@munnari.OZ.AU)
Cc: Fred Baker <>,
Subject: Re:
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 03 Jan 1995 15:35:52 PST." <>
Date: Wed, 04 Jan 1995 03:19:29 +0000
Message-Id: <4794.789189569@munnari.OZ.AU>
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Robert Elz <>

    Date:        Tue, 3 Jan 1995 15:35:52 -0800 (PST)
    From:        bmanning@ISI.EDU
    Message-ID:  <>

    > >        - DNS resolver          - Add as comments to documentation

    "A router MAY implement DNS resolver code as an aid to management."

This would be pretty silly, ther only reason its worth sticking
in MAY type stuff at all is when there is a prohibition on
something, and a specific exception needs to be made, and just
occasionally when there appears to be some kind of misplaced
world view that something is inappropriate, and that needs to
be corrected.

Neither is relevant to DNS and routers, and I personally can't
see any reason to mention it at all.   If we did, what else are
we going to stick in ... "A router MAY implement a SMTP client
and send mail when xxx occurs" (or course it may, but need that
be said?), or "A router MAY provide a compiler and allow users
to compile and run applications" - again, or course it may, or
"A router MAY implement terminal server functionality".  Where
would it end?