IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] Fwd: djb on NXDOMAIN/NODATA for non-terminals

Paul Vixie <vixie@isc.org> Tue, 29 March 2011 15:54 UTC

Return-Path: <vixie@isc.org>
X-Original-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 150183A690E for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 08:54:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.077, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WZPdqLmS7TBG for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 08:54:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nsa.vix.com (unknown [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:bb:230:48ff:fe5a:2f38]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E54243A67E4 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 08:54:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nsa.vix.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nsa.vix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A79D0A1064 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 15:56:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vixie@isc.org)
From: Paul Vixie <vixie@isc.org>
To: dnsext@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 29 Mar 2011 15:38:55 GMT." <82fwq6vsvk.fsf@mid.bfk.de>
References: <AANLkTimCZVyag8+Pv8zJsah2B-C=h3bPJ=DNVVo3agLc@mail.gmail.com> <34319.1301351478@nsa.vix.com> <BANLkTikkx4ndK3TpByptuRdtPGuFztm2yA@mail.gmail.com> <65033.1301383238@nsa.vix.com> <82ei5qz3bi.fsf@mid.bfk.de> <84978.1301403827@nsa.vix.com> <82fwq6vsvk.fsf@mid.bfk.de>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.2; nmh 1.3; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 22)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 15:56:30 +0000
Message-ID: <94669.1301414190@nsa.vix.com>
Subject: Re: [dnsext] Fwd: djb on NXDOMAIN/NODATA for non-terminals
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 15:54:55 -0000

> From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@bfk.de>
> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 15:38:55 +0000
> 
> > this sounds like a veiled suggestion that we remove this from resimprove
> 
> I strongly believe that this would improve the quality of the document
> (in terms of reflecting existing practice), so yes. 8-)

is there any opposition to this change?

> > and that someone get working on an aggressive negative caching proposal?
> 
> I'm not sure if it is worth the effort.  But if better negative
> caching is the goal, DNSSEC data seems a reasonable candidate for
> further information.

whether using dnssec or not, aggressive negative caching would need a document.

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status