But looking back at incidents such as the Zonelabs/Abovenet issue, your advice is correct for the network we have today.
as that rfc is over a decade old, i am not optimistic that change is neigh <sigh>. and it is amusing to see ;; ANSWER SECTION: harvard.edu. 10794 IN NS ns2.harvard.edu. harvard.edu. 10794 IN NS ns3.br.harvard.edu. harvard.edu. 10794 IN NS ns.harvard.edu. harvard.edu. 10794 IN NS ns1.harvard.edu. ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: ns.harvard.edu. 10794 IN A 128.103.201.100 ns1.harvard.edu. 10794 IN A 128.103.200.101 ns2.harvard.edu. 10794 IN A 128.103.1.1 ns3.br.harvard.edu. 10794 IN A 128.119.3.170 and ;; ANSWER SECTION: mit.edu. 21600 IN NS STRAWB.mit.edu. mit.edu. 21600 IN NS W20NS.mit.edu. mit.edu. 21600 IN NS BITSY.mit.edu. ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: BITSY.mit.edu. 21600 IN A 18.72.0.3 STRAWB.mit.edu. 21600 IN A 18.71.0.151 W20NS.mit.edu. 21600 IN A 18.70.0.160 but microsoft/hotmail learned the lesson the hard way, if you remember, and look to have reasonable looking deployment, though i have not looked at traceroutes. randy