IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Possible slower response with minimization

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Sat, 25 October 2014 19:39 UTC

Return-Path: <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA3F61A3BA7 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 25 Oct 2014 12:39:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cDXnypsFltA2 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 25 Oct 2014 12:39:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.bortzmeyer.org (aetius.bortzmeyer.org [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc0:41:216:3eff:fece:1902]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD85D1A3BA2 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sat, 25 Oct 2014 12:39:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id 69C043C426; Sat, 25 Oct 2014 21:39:15 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by tyrion (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0912BF0175F; Sat, 25 Oct 2014 21:31:41 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2014 21:31:41 +0200
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <20141025193141.GA5336@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
References: <CA+nkc8AVaJtKGF1iUvTW50d9mwdsEf7SbGExV+Oq2vPmGu7P5w@mail.gmail.com> <5445DEC4.4020909@dougbarton.us> <5445EBC9.4080404@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <20141025160516.GC28710@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20141025160516.GC28710@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
X-Transport: UUCP rules
X-Operating-System: Ubuntu 14.04 (trusty)
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/6MbZ3YBpWibNeCSYwclNl22m64I
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Possible slower response with minimization
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2014 19:39:19 -0000

On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 06:05:16PM +0200,
 Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> wrote 
 a message of 24 lines which said:

> > Right, NXDOMAIN returned by some broken implementation to
> > empty non-terminals MUST NOT be interpreted that the
> > terminals does not exist.
> 
> Full agreement again 

Paul Vixie was right, I've read your sentence too fast. I focused on
the "broken implementation" part (on which we agree, these
implementations are awfully broken) and missed the meaning of the
double negation. So, to rephrase it, my opinion is:

NXDOMAIN returned by some broken implementation to empty non-terminals
is a bug. A NXDOMAIN MUST be interpreted as "the node in the domain
tree, AND ALL ITS SUBNODES, do not exist".

v2.30.2 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status