Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any

[Matthijs Mekking <[e-mail]>]

Are we still creating standards based on "BIND does this"? :p

On 28-11-16 13:57, Tony Finch wrote:
> Matthijs Mekking <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> 1. In case of a DNS responder selecting one or a subset of the RRsets at the
>> QNAME, The draft does not give clear guidance on which RRset(s) to pick.
>
> The code in BIND just picks an arbitrary RRset, without making any effort
> to be clever.
>
> It makes an ANY query to the back end, then adds the first RRset to the
> response. The data from the back end doesn't have a deterministic order.
> Doing better than this would (I think) require additional methods in the
> rdataset API to get the size of the RRset. Unless we use a dumb heuristic
> like smallest RR TYPE number :-)

Fair enough for reasoning not to use a determinative mechanism, but in 
that case such considerations should be added to the document IMO.

Best regards,
   Matthijs

>> 2. People expressed that they would like to see ANY over TCP stick to the
>> original (undefined) behavior, that is to return all RRsets at the QNAME.
>
> BIND does this.
>
>> One more nit comment, I would like to see explicitly called out in section 7
>> that "DNS implementations are free to not return all RRSIGS *in case
>> QTYPE=RRSIG*".
>
> BIND also does this.
>
> Tony.
>