Re: [DNSOP] status opcode?
"Peter van Dijk" <peter.van.dijk@powerdns.com> Wed, 09 November 2016 12:01 UTC
Return-Path: <peter.van.dijk@powerdns.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C96CB129C10 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 04:01:09 -0800 (PST)
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 autolearn_force=no
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 iz-dUxJKSIWR for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 04:01:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shannon.7bits.nl (shannon.7bits.nl [89.188.0.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30CBE129C0C for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 04:01:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.242.2.13] (unknown [92.110.143.62]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: peter) by shannon.7bits.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5112FC1B96; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 13:01:03 +0100 (CET)
From: Peter van Dijk <peter.van.dijk@powerdns.com>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2016 13:01:03 +0100
Message-ID: <09AE92A3-FE49-47CC-A52F-6334DD64D810@powerdns.com>
In-Reply-To: <20161012193813.vkyhvumdjdsufyj2@mycre.ws>
References: <20161012193813.vkyhvumdjdsufyj2@mycre.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.5r5263)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/6xL2fQmkQenvWqr2UI7PlzV-bn0>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] status opcode?
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 09 Nov 2016 12:01:09 -0000
Hello Robert, On 12 Oct 2016, at 21:38, Robert Edmonds wrote: > What are status queries? Were they ever defined? Are they obsolete? I have been unable to find a definition, and I tried quite hard earlier this year when a customer complained we were not handling them! Some VOIP equipment that shall remain unnamed needed to do ENUM queries, but only after a successful ‘health check’. The health check looked like this (sorry, don’t have the pcap handy, just this summary): ID 0 flags all zero except for the rcode=2 all counts zero 6 trailing NUL bytes Once pdns_server started responding NOTIMP, instead of dropping the query, the equipment was happy. Kind regards, -- Peter van Dijk PowerDNS.COM BV - https://www.powerdns.com/
- [DNSOP] status opcode? Robert Edmonds
- Re: [DNSOP] status opcode? Mark Andrews
- Re: [DNSOP] status opcode? Peter van Dijk
- Re: [DNSOP] status opcode? Roy Arends