Re: [dnsext] How well supported are unknown RRs in modern resolvers?

Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk> Tue, 08 March 2011 21:39 UTC

Return-Path: <alex@alex.org.uk>
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 24F8C3A63EC for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Mar 2011 13:39:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 VLToknJc8Tzk for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Mar 2011 13:39:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.avalus.com (mail.avalus.com [89.16.176.221]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BAE23A63C9 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Mar 2011 13:39:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.16.2.233] (lemondeh-adsl.demon.co.uk [83.105.105.209]) by mail.avalus.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9C6EEC5635E; Tue, 8 Mar 2011 21:41:07 +0000 (GMT)
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2011 21:41:06 +0000
From: Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk>
To: Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us>, dnsext@ietf.org
Message-ID: <B5393963B7B95CA5927105FE@nimrod.local>
In-Reply-To: <4D76A01E.5000005@dougbarton.us>
References: <4D76A01E.5000005@dougbarton.us>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Mac OS X)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Subject: Re: [dnsext] How well supported are unknown RRs in modern resolvers?
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk>
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, 08 Mar 2011 21:39:54 -0000

--On 8 March 2011 13:31:10 -0800 Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us> wrote:

> The point Nicholas made about moving the CLONE logic to the stub is
> something I'm interested in pursuing, but my understanding is that "a
> lot" of resolving name servers still have problems dealing with RR types
> they don't understand. Is this still true?

I would expand your worry-space from resolvers to include middleboxen also.

Nick should have / could collect some good data on this. I think this is
going to push us into EDNS if only for signalling reasons. Ray Bellis's
report suggests that serious SOHO CPE problems will arise if the packets
get larger than 512 bytes, but I don't think he explicitly tested unknown
RRs.

-- 
Alex Bligh