Re: provisioning software, was DNS RRTYPEs, the difficulty with

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

 



Martin Rex wrote:
> 
> Tony Finch wrote:
> > 
> > Murray S. Kucherawy <msk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > I looked at least at the titles of all the documents that update 1035,
> > > and none of them appear to be related to the above.  So where should we
> > > be looking?
> > 
> > The only thing I have found that implies NOTIMP doesn't apply to queries
> > for unknown RR types is in RFC 4074, "Common Misbehavior Against DNS
> > Queries for IPv6 Addresses":
> 
> Thanks for mentioning rfc 4074.  The stuff in that document matches
> the thoroughly broken behaviour of the IPv6 DNS resolver client of
> Windows 2003 that I had encountered just recently.
> 
> IMO, rfc4074 exhibits a significant amount of cluelessness about DNS,
> the "Full Standard" document maturity level, and the realities of
> backwards compatibilities for an incredibly huge installed base.
> 
> 
> The answer to the question "what can I infer from a failed AAAA lookup"
> must be deduced from STD 13 **ALONE**, and it amounts to "very close to
> nothing at all".

In case this isn't clear:  this applies to DNS responses with one of
the failure RCODEs (1,2,3,4,5) defined in rfc1035 _unless_ the response
is accompanied by some protocol extension that can be used to **reliably**
distinguish 1034/1035 DNS responders from those conforming to a later,
optional DNS protocol extension.


-Martin
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


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