IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] partial glue is not enough, I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-glue-is-not-optional-00.txt

Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> Fri, 03 July 2020 09:33 UTC

Return-Path: <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
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 15C133A0B4B for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 02:33:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DOS_RCVD_IP_TWICE_B=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] 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 OkzkRQh-IM7z for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 02:33:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp [131.112.32.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id AEE413A0528 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 02:33:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 54273 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2020 09:16:34 -0000
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (131.112.32.132) by necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp with SMTP; 3 Jul 2020 09:16:34 -0000
To: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <20200702011816.D4B0D1C3CD10@ary.qy> <2843010.V8yvLItfke@linux-9daj> <alpine.OSX.2.22.407.2007020949360.96330@ary.qy> <6402649.6cnN7U4pX5@linux-9daj> <20200702154841.GA83916@jurassic.vpn.mukund.org> <F71B8055-415E-4DF4-8089-04AA1445269D@icann.org>
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <eb8b546b-4cc5-a6e3-21bf-3123921defba@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2020 18:33:59 +0900
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <F71B8055-415E-4DF4-8089-04AA1445269D@icann.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-2022-jp"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/YQbSigYRKKq0D0AKvWyz1EspjXo>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] partial glue is not enough, I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-glue-is-not-optional-00.txt
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 03 Jul 2020 09:33:56 -0000

Paul Hoffman wrote:

> RFC 1035 and RFC 2181 are unclear about whether an RRset that is
> required in a reply can be partial.

1035 is clear:

    - When several RRs of the same type are available for a
      particular owner name, the resolver should either cache them
      all or none at all.  When a response is truncated, and a
      resolver doesn't know whether it has a complete set, it should
      not cache a possibly partial set of RRs.

						Masataka Ohta

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email