Scott Bradner <> Wed, 04 January 1995 04:39 UTC

Received: from by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa14682; 3 Jan 95 23:39 EST
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa14678; 3 Jan 95 23:39 EST
Received: from by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa29154; 3 Jan 95 23:39 EST
Received: from by (5.65c/5.61+local-20) id <AA14613>; Tue, 3 Jan 1995 20:18:59 -0800
Received: (from sob@localhost) by (8.6.9/8.6.9-MT2.02) id XAA20119; Tue, 3 Jan 1995 23:21:01 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 23:21:01 -0500 (EST)
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Scott Bradner <>
Message-Id: <>
Subject: Re:

>      "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.

The only reason I can think of is to give a vendor a hit that it might be
a good idea.  Not enough of a reason to keep the reference for me.