Re: [Last-Call] Dnsdir last call review of draft-ietf-dnsop-caching-resolution-failures-06

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




> On Aug 14, 2023, at 1:40 AM, Peter van Dijk via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Reviewer: Peter van Dijk
> Review result: Ready with Nits
> 
> Thank you for processing my previous comments. The document is in great shape.
> I have one nit:
> 
> One of the new sections based on my earlier comments is "2.7.  FORMERR
> Responses". It currently says
> 
>> Upon receipt of a FORMERR response, recursive clients generally retry their
> queries without EDNS(0).
> 
> For most resolver implementations (Knot, Unbound, PowerDNS, but not BIND), this
> is only true if the FORMERR response does not contain EDNS(0)/OPT. There are
> auths out there that send FORMERR+OPT responses, and they are not getting
> non-EDNS0 fallback behaviour from such resolvers.
> 
>> Thus, resolution failures from FORMERR responses are rare.
> 
> This, meanwhile, remains true. When they happen, they tend to be persistent,
> and noticed, leading to fixes.
> 
> I don't have a strong suggestion for rewording. Perhaps replace "recursive
> clients generally" with "some recursive clients might"? I can also live with
> the current text, but I did want to point out this nuance.
> 

Peter, thanks for the feedback.

How about this change to that paragraph?

   Upon receipt of a FORMERR response, some recursive clients will retry
   their queries without EDNS(0), while others will not.  Nonetheless,
   resolution failures from FORMERR responses are rare.

DW


-- 
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call



[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux