[dnsext] BADVER/FORMERR

[Mark Andrews <[e-mail]>]

I was looking for a good way to test for EDNS support and hacked
dig to send out a empty question section when the EDNS version was
set to 255 and got what I believe to be incorrect responses from K
and L.  EDNS version processing is supposed to take precedence over
examining the query section as the EDNS version can influence the
interpretion of the question section.  I believe the correct response
should be BADVERS.  Adding a question elicited BADVERS.

Do others agree with my interpretion of rcode precedence?

Mark

marka% bin/dig/dig +edns=255 +norec @k.root-servers.net

; <<>> DiG 9.9.0b1 <<>> +edns=255 +norec @k.root-servers.net
; (2 servers found)
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: FORMERR, id: 40361
;; flags: qr; QUERY: 0, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0

;; Query time: 255 msec
;; SERVER: 2001:7fd::1#53(2001:7fd::1)
;; WHEN: Fri Nov 11 13:34:50 2011
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 12

marka% bin/dig/dig +edns=255 +norec @l.root-servers.net

; <<>> DiG 9.9.0b1 <<>> +edns=255 +norec @l.root-servers.net
; (2 servers found)
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: FORMERR, id: 34663
;; flags: qr; QUERY: 0, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0

;; Query time: 175 msec
;; SERVER: 2001:500:3::42#53(2001:500:3::42)
;; WHEN: Fri Nov 11 13:35:08 2011
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 12

-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE:	[phone]		         INTERNET: [e-mail]