IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] WG opinion on draft : Improvements to DNS Resolvers, for Resiliency, Robustness, and Responsiveness

Florian Weimer <fweimer@bfk.de> Wed, 23 February 2011 16:18 UTC

Return-Path: <fweimer@bfk.de>
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 48B663A6A0C for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 08:18:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.228
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.228 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.021, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35]
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 5Pr3E1FzdIlj for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 08:18:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx01.bfk.de (mx01.bfk.de [193.227.124.2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 550CD3A67A1 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 08:18:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx00.int.bfk.de ([10.119.110.2]) by mx01.bfk.de with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) id 1PsHRB-0001wj-FB; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 16:19:37 +0000
Received: by bfk.de with local id 1PsHRB-0007dq-Bz; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 16:19:37 +0000
To: Paul Vixie <vixie@isc.org>
References: <4D622624.90303@ogud.com> <BF79BE89-20B2-4897-B07C-1426745C4AA9@verisign.com> <AANLkTinQig=e7wv-3GsXi73p3AKQOsbjE6EzDNMbWWRw@mail.gmail.com> <4D63907A.8010700@nlnetlabs.nl> <82zkpnyt3z.fsf@mid.bfk.de> <22348.1298455916@nsa.vix.com> <82ei6zyqqz.fsf@mid.bfk.de> <39328.1298474414@nsa.vix.com> <82y656u4zb.fsf@mid.bfk.de>
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@bfk.de>
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 16:19:37 +0000
In-Reply-To: <82y656u4zb.fsf@mid.bfk.de> (Florian Weimer's message of "Wed\, 23 Feb 2011 15\:48\:24 +0000")
Message-ID: <82ei6yu3ja.fsf@mid.bfk.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: dnsext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dnsext] WG opinion on draft : Improvements to DNS Resolvers, for Resiliency, Robustness, and Responsiveness
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: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 16:18:54 -0000

* Florian Weimer:

>> nlnetlabs nsd and verisign atlas both understood the spec in this
>> regard also.
>
> Actually, ATLAS sent NXDOMAIN instead of NODATA for existing,
> non-delegated names with a missing RRset (that is, empty terminals) at
> one point in the not too-distant past.  I don't remember if they
> implemented the old BIND behavior, too, but it would be odd to send
> NXDOMAIN for empty terminals, and NODATA for empty non-terminals.

Off-list, I was told that my terminology is off, which is true.
Please read "empty RRsets" for "empty terminals".

-- 
Florian Weimer                <fweimer@bfk.de>
BFK edv-consulting GmbH       http://www.bfk.de/
Kriegsstraße 100              tel: +49-721-96201-1
D-76133 Karlsruhe             fax: +49-721-96201-99

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email