IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] On some terminology in draft-ietf-dnsop-respsize (truncation)

Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> Mon, 03 March 2014 15:14 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@redbarn.org>
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 4BECA1A0075 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 07:14:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 rMvalt7o7RL9 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 07:14:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ss.vix.su (ss.vix.su [24.104.150.2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E98CC1A0062 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 07:14:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:559:8000:cb:25db:1a19:1419:457b] (unknown [IPv6:2001:559:8000:cb:25db:1a19:1419:457b]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ss.vix.su (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 11D46EBCC0; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 15:14:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from paul@redbarn.org)
Message-ID: <53149C57.1040105@redbarn.org>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 07:14:31 -0800
From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
User-Agent: Postbox 3.0.9 (Windows/20140128)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
References: <20140303105138.GA3875@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
In-Reply-To: <20140303105138.GA3875@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------070008040301050200080302"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/QZUi92skv1xnSfbq-a920V03kY4
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] On some terminology in draft-ietf-dnsop-respsize (truncation)
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: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 15:14:32 -0000


Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> draft-ietf-dnsop-respsize-15.txt says:
>
>> will automatically requery for RRSets that are possibly truncated
>
> I don't think that a RRset can be "possibly truncated". Either it is
> truncated (not sent in its entirety) and the TC bit is set, the
> resolver does not have to guess, or it is not truncated. There is
> never an ambiguity. (Unless you use "truncation" in the sloppy sense I
> criticized above.)

are you advising (by implication) that a receiver who hears TC=1 with
ANCOUNT>0 or NSCOUNT>0 or ADCOUNT>0 treat it as a FORMERR?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email