IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Clarifying referrals (#35)

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Sun, 12 November 2017 13:19 UTC

Return-Path: <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
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 9453D129438 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 05:19:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] 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 lMD1YTRP06_3 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 05:19:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.bortzmeyer.org (aetius.bortzmeyer.org [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc0:41:216:3eff:fece:1902]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE0A71292AE for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 05:19:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id 8089D31D05; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 14:19:03 +0100 (CET)
Received: by godin (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D516BEC0B85; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 14:18:31 +0100 (CET)
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2017 21:18:31 +0800
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20171112131831.GA32208@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
References: <20171112075445.tf2ut5dxzhhnqe7l@mx4.yitter.info>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20171112075445.tf2ut5dxzhhnqe7l@mx4.yitter.info>
X-Transport: UUCP rules
X-Operating-System: Ubuntu 16.04 (xenial)
X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/bW09tSGhAUaQGiKuKs1oXvS3I6o>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Clarifying referrals (#35)
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Sun, 12 Nov 2017 13:19:06 -0000

On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 02:54:46AM -0500,
 Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> wrote 
 a message of 74 lines which said:

> The second is a non-delegation referral (sometimes described as
> "referral response", as distinct from the delegation response
> above), where the server is not authoritative for any portion of the
> QNAME.  In this case, the referred-to zone in the Authority section
> is usually[1] the root zone (.).

This is an upward referral and I tought it was frowned upon since the
ISPrime attack (MUST NOT?  SHOULD NOT?)
<https://www.dns-oarc.net/oarc/articles/upward-referrals-considered-harmful>

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status