Re: [DNSOP] Unexpected REFUSED from BIND when using example config from RFC7706

Bjørn Mork <> Fri, 07 April 2017 08:50 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D2081293FF for <>; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 01:50:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.3
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JAiLZuowS4Uk for <>; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 01:50:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:4641::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7273512948F for <>; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 01:50:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([IPv6:2a02:2121:45:dc4d:b474:86ff:fe5d:4ecf]) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v378oEeW000341 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 7 Apr 2017 10:50:15 +0200
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=b; t=1491555015; bh=kuj5q46JowDe77skua/Uv8Q5XHeZNCYXSkRvbVQzSWI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:Message-ID:From; b=kFob2P5dGm8AITS+gf7WKkpMGBQXxAz2zD/1m30jIroK13gT6pxIbFOFqm7EUfIKt cRcC8PE0VWNpvDP+ccnyA0b84GzPj6m5V/stH37d9hp3GHgdURIFOl2DR3FrFJJjOn 2zVc0tN3N8NSH6jZQCX8AxLk1rgAGEu73P8ARPrA=
Received: from bjorn by with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <>) id 1cwPar-00015C-GZ; Fri, 07 Apr 2017 10:50:09 +0200
From: Bjørn Mork <>
To: bert hubert <>
Organization: m
References: <> <2448193.4rPzoQ60ob@linux-hs2j> <f321b974-2149-478d-9b63-a19d10ed013e@Spark> <1560750.L0Fn6CvLxk@linux-hs2j> <> <>
Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2017 10:50:09 +0200
In-Reply-To: <> (bert hubert's message of "Fri, 7 Apr 2017 10:23:26 +0200")
Message-ID: <>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.130015 (Ma Gnus v0.15) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99.2 at canardo
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Unexpected REFUSED from BIND when using example config from RFC7706
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2017 08:50:19 -0000

bert hubert <> writes:
> On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 10:20:00AM +0200, Bjørn Mork wrote:
>> Just to avoid any confusion: Although I demonstrated the issue by
>> running BIND on my laptop only, the real usage scenario is resolver
>> service for a few million distinct administrative domains (aka
>> "customers").  Changing the trust anchor is not an option.
> Perhaps is a great place
> to discuss BIND configurations and issues.

Definitely.  Or even bind-workers when it comes to questions about the
reason for making static-stub zones recursive only.

The reason I ask here first, is because RFC 7706 includes a BIND
specific configuration example (as well as examples for other recursive
server software).  So before considering changing config or code, I
wanted to know the background of that example. Was there a real reason
for the obscure(?)  "static-stub" zone type, or was that just an
arbitrary choice?

My apologies if this is considered OT here. I will shut up now.