Ted Lemon wrote:
It is certainly not the goal. Can you tell exactly where it is assumed? Section 2 is supposed to be implementation-neutral.Right here: When an iterative caching DNS resolver receives a response NXDOMAIN, it SHOULD store it in its cache and all names and RRsets at or below that node SHOULD then be considered to be unreachable. Subsequent queries for such names SHOULD elicit an NXDOMAIN response. "At or below" assumes a tree. Just because it isn't explicitly mentioned doesn't mean that it's not saying that!
i took the words "at or below" to mean "in-bailiwick". caches that are not organized as tree-like data structures still have to be able to find the closest encloser, which means they do know ancestor/descendent relationships, even if the data structure itself is otherwise flatishly hashlike.
-- P Vixie _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
