Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-andrews-dnsop-glue-is-not-optional

[Paul Vixie <[e-mail]>]

On Friday, 22 May 2020 00:31:34 UTC Masataka Ohta wrote:
> ...
> 
> While I'm not against the clarification, the draft should mention
> that rfc1034 already states:
> 
>     To fix this problem, a zone contains "glue" RRs which are not
>     part of the authoritative data, and are address RRs for the servers.
>     These RRs are only necessary if the name server's name is "below" the
>     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>     cut, and are only used as part of a referral response.
>                  ^^^^^^^^^
> 
> which means the glue RRs are necessary for a referral response.
> Though not very obvious, it logically means that they MUST be
> included as part of a referral response, because it is the only
> reason to make them necessary.

i agree. this is why later versions of BIND would return referrals rather than 
answers when queried for these names, which were in-bailiwick but below-zone. 
by implication, they can only be retrieved from the delegating server as part 
of a referral, and they will be in the additional section not the answer 
section even though they do match the qname. this distinction is also 
necessary in the assignment of credibility levels in the downstream cache.

-- 
Paul