In message <1a3d420a-32cc-464f-ada5-401a9dc76...@nic.br>, Rubens Kuhl writes: > > Besides ccTLD, out of ICANN contractual reach, looks like TLDs from > Uniregistry (including ISC servers) and Neustar are the ones most > mentioned here. Any outreach attempt, successful or otherwise, with > Uniregistry, ISC and Neustar ?
The timeouts on tld.isc-sns.info are being addressed. I'd already complained to ops about them and it looks like bad traffic shaping in front of that server. I'm more worried about getting the checks built into the delegation process so that servers are correct from the get go. Next is getting the existing servers fixed. One can also add "unexpected opcode handling", "zflag handling" (the last unassigned DNS flag), and "ad flag handling" to the EDNS handling. All of these have resulted in servers not responding which is really bad given DNS is a query / response protocol. For unexpected opcode I would expect to see NOTIMP. BIND 9.11's dig will be able to test this (dig +opcode=value). Mark > Rubens > > > On May 18, 2015, at 8:50 PM, Mark Andrews <ma...@isc.org> wrote: > > > > > > Can we get DNS and EDNS Protocol Compliance added to the acceptance > > criteria for nameservers for TLDs. > > > > http://ednscomp.isc.org/compliance/tld-report.html > > > > shows this is NOT happening. It isn't hard to test for. Eight dig > > queries per server is all that was required to generate this report. > > > > Mark > > -- > > Mark Andrews, ISC > > 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia > > PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > > DNSOP mailing list > > DNSOP@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
