Thats all correct, and I do agree with that, I've got far more time for the 
RFC than ICANN. 

However we don't follow the RFC explicitly pretty regularly. For example you 
really shouldn't put a CNAME on the root of a domain. Yet not only do we do 
it, big entities like Google actively encourage it.

Similarly, and I'd have to take a look at the RFC, I don't believe SPF records 
in the TXT record of a domain were exactly accounted for in the original RFC, 
but here we are using them in a way they weren't really designed to be used. 

But it is a good question what do BigPond advise they offer, is it a pure and 
unadulterated connection to the internet? I'm fairly certain their T&C says 
it's their connection and they'll do whatever they feel like on any given day.

> At the risk of being branded a purist and any number of other things, I
> would like to make a comment. If they are indeed advertising themselves as
> being a provider of a connection to the "Internet", then the internet is
> defined by the protocols and intercommunication systems that make it up. If
> they are advertising a connection to "Bigpond Net", then all bets are off
>  :)
> 
> 
> The "Request For Comments" structure is at the heart of this, and they can
> be found at the Internet Engineering Taskforce home page -:
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc.html
> 
> What Bigpond are currently involved in refers specifically to  RFC 1034
>  with a little 1035.
> 
> 5.2.1 section 3.
> -----------------------
> When the resolver performs the indicated function, it usually has one of
> the following results to pass back to the client:
> 
>    - One or more RRs giving the requested data.
> 
>      In this case the resolver returns the answer in the
>      appropriate format.
> 
>    - A name error (NE).
> 
>      This happens when the referenced name does not exist.  For
>      example, a user may have mistyped a host name.
> ------------------------
> 
> These are the ties that "bind". You want to change them, submit an RFC.
> 
> Currently, if Bigpond are not providing that result from a DNS query on
> their default name server, that name server is not performing as an
>  Internet Name server should as per RFC 1034.
> 
> As regards the Web, it matters not one whit what is in the html of the page
> that is returned. Technically speaking, it only matters what is in the
> response code. There is no specification what is in the HTML or TEXT that
>  is returned, just the code.
> 
> http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html
> 
> It must return a 404 if the page does not exist. The 404 page can contain a
> singing donkey and a dancing penguin. But it must be a 404. To be in spec.
> 
> -- James :) Collins - Head Office * +61-7-3823-5150 *
>    ,-_|\    Australasian Online Services Registry
>   /      *  Sydney Office      - +61-2-8011-3237
>   \_,-._/   Canberra Office    - +61-2-6100-7721
>         v   Fax Number         - +61-7-3823-5152
> www.aosreg.com.au - P.O. Box 1073, Capalaba, Qld, 4157
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://dotau.org/
>