Re: [DNSOP] WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-let-localhost-be-localhost-02

[Paul Vixie <[e-mail]>]

Ray Bellis wrote:
> On 30/01/2018 18:59, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>
>> Because of that same section, also, signing the answer should also not
>> be controversial because the answer is static.  My preference,
>> however, would be for the root servers to REFUSE to answer such
>> queries.
>
> Won't that cause the resolver to cycle through every root server letter
> hoping for one that doesn't give that answer?

yes. that's what REFUSED is taken to mean, and also, why we never use it 
for data-dependent conditions. only the initiator's identity matters in 
the consideration of whether to transmit REFUSED or not.

-- 
P Vixie