Re: Something better than DNS?

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

 



> > (By-the-way, why is EDNS/RFC 2671 not advancing on the standards  
> > track?)
> 
> Good question.
> 
> Rgds,
> -drc

	It's on the dnsext charter though a little late.

Jun 2005	  	RFC2671 (EDNS0) to Draft Standard 

	Most of the issues with RFC2671 are the result on non
	conformance w/ RFC 103[45] and firewall that *think* they
	know what is a valid DNS packet or feel that IP fragmentation
	should not be allowed.

	Note the later two usually affect the client side and when
	lookups start failing they usually address the issue.

	The non conformance with RFC 103[45] usually takes the form
	of dropping packets the server doesn't know how to handle
	rather than returning a error code.

	Note: in general EDNS0 just works.

	Mark
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews@xxxxxxx

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

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