Re: [DNSOP] Fracturing the protocol - was Re: Updated cheese-shop.

[Edward Lewis <[e-mail]>]

On 2/29/16, 10:03, "Shane Kerr" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Ah. So you don't like identifying magic zones (other than in-addr.arpa,
>ip6.arpa, .example, .local, ...). Fair enough.

What's magic about any of them?  In the protocol they all are processed
the same.

There is no "reverse DNS" protocol, what's confusing is that there is a
convention for storing addresses in the DNS.  (E.g.,
myhost.*.foo.bar.in-addr.arpa. is an acceptable domain name.  Applications
never seriously look it up.)

If asked on port 53, name servers will return NXDOMAIN for names under
"example." and "local." if those names lack NS sets in the root zone.

All magic treatment of those names occur in other software layers.

>I don't expect to change your mind but hopefully I understand your
>position and can thus disagree with your actual stance. ;)

I have no idea why assembling a NXDOMAIN response from cached DNSSEC
negative answers is any different if the QNAME is managed by the root zone
or is managed by a zone delegated away from the root.  The only thing
unique to the root zone is that there is no authority that can publish the
root zone's DS record, which has nothing to do with the question at hand.