IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] draft-li-dnsext-ipv4-ipv6 -- a more versatile proposal

Andras Salamon <andras@dns.net> Sat, 07 November 2009 11:06 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-dnsext-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-dnsext-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B58128C10E; Sat, 7 Nov 2009 03:06:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.437
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.437 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
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 X0236xS8wK+A; Sat, 7 Nov 2009 03:06:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from psg.com (psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 370A328C0E0; Sat, 7 Nov 2009 03:06:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>) id 1N6j2A-0006wN-Jt for namedroppers-data0@psg.com; Sat, 07 Nov 2009 11:00:42 +0000
Received: from [64.39.31.27] (helo=server1.dns.net) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <andras@dns.net>) id 1N6j27-0006w8-Fx for namedroppers@ops.ietf.org; Sat, 07 Nov 2009 11:00:39 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by server1.dns.net (8.11.7/8.11.6) id nA7B0bi29873; Sat, 7 Nov 2009 11:00:37 GMT
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2009 11:01:07 +0000
From: Andras Salamon <andras@dns.net>
To: namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-li-dnsext-ipv4-ipv6 -- a more versatile proposal
Message-ID: <20091107110107.GA4827@gaon.net>
References: <200911062102.WAA27842@TR-Sys.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <200911062102.WAA27842@TR-Sys.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Sender: owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <namedroppers.ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: To unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
List-Unsubscribe: the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
List-Archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 10:02:05PM +0100, Alfred Hönes wrote:
>-  The RGMASK EDNS option is echoed back (iff the answerer understands
>RGRP and this option).  Any bit still set in the echoed bit mask
>indicates knowledge at the answerer of the corresponding RRset (with no
>such RR present in the answer signalling per-RRtype selective NODATA);
>clearing of a bit would indicate lack of knowledge of the corresponding
>RRset and only be allowed only for cache servers, not for authorities.

The meaning of set/cleared bits is unclear to me.

What is the right thing to do if:
1. a server receives one of these blob queries for type X and Y,
2. the cache contains an authoritative entry for type X,
3. the cache contains an NXDOMAIN entry for type Y?

Due to negative caching there seem to be three possible states:
present, absent, negative-present (this last being a weak proxy
for known-absent-from-zonefile).  Further, does "knowledge" mean
"authoritative" or "present in cache"?

-- Andras Salamon                   andras@dns.net

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status