Mark Andrews wrote:
... please explain how RFC 1034 Section 4.3.2. Algorithm can return
a Name Error for a empty non-terminal. I don't see it unless there
is a missing delegation and that is a configuration error. I have
zero problems with a cache returning Name Error if there is a
configuration error.
i see no ambiguity in RFC 1034 4.3.2.
however, the wording of RFC 1035 4.1.1 could be clearer:
3 Name Error - Meaningful only for
responses from an authoritative name
server, this code signifies that the
domain name referenced in the query does
not exist.
of course, name error is also meaningful for responses from a caching
recursive name server, so perhaps this text should be treated suspiciously.
see also this text from [ibid] 6.2.2:
All of these data structures can be implemented an identical tree
structure format, with different data chained off the nodes in different
parts: in the catalog the data is pointers to zones, while in the zone
and cache data structures, the data will be RRs. In designing the tree
framework the designer should recognize that query processing will need
to traverse the tree using case-insensitive label comparisons; and that
in real data, a few nodes have a very high branching factor (100-1000 or
more), but the vast majority have a very low branching factor (0-1).
100-1000, eh?
--
P Vixie
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
