> On 26 Mar 2018, at 16:47, Jim Reid <j...@rfc1035.com> wrote:
>
> On 24 Mar 2018, at 20:20, Ondřej Surý <ond...@isc.org> wrote:
>>
>>> It might be a different story if one of those zombie RRtypes required
>>> additional processing. None spring to mind though.
>>
>> But (most of) those I picked actually *DO*:
>>
>> a) compression is allowed, so compliant and non-compliant servers can’t
>> speak together, because non-compliant will just store junk in the RDATA when
>> received from compliant server;
>> b) the RDATA needs to be understood and lowercased for canonical form when
>> DNSSEC signing; again you need to *implement* this in DNSSEC Validator as it
>> would cause validation failures if you don't
>
> Fair enough Ondřej. Though I suspect the number of servers that sign or
> validate MAILA records (or whatever) can be counted on the number of ears on
> one hand. :-)
On a sunny day, while casually strolling the BIND source code, I found this:
case dns_rdatatype_maila:
case dns_rdatatype_mailb:
query_error(client, DNS_R_NOTIMP, __LINE__);
return;
So, again, making this _official_ and actually obsolete types that even BIND
doesn’t implement, somehow still makes sense to me.
Ondrej
--
Ondřej Surý
ond...@isc.org
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
