The essence of this draft is the addition of once sentence to RFC 1034: "If glue RRs do not fit set TC=1 in the header."
I worry that this is too ambiguous. Does it mean all glue? One glue? As much as will fit? AFAIK most software today is designed to fill up the additional section with as much glue as possible. Is the name server allowed to add only some glue RRs, even if more would fit (without truncating, or in a TCP response)? Is the name server allowed to fill the additional with all records of one type, AAAA or A, when the resolver might only have connectivity of the other type? There is also the question of in-domain vs sibling-domain glue. RFC 8499 (Terminology) notes that "Glue records for sibling domains are allowed, but not necessary." Should in-domain glue take priority over sibling-domain glue? Can sibling-domain glue be omitted even if it would fit? DW > On Jun 3, 2020, at 7:36 PM, internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote: > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations WG of the IETF. > > Title : Glue In DNS Referral Responses Is Not Optional > Author : M. Andrews > Filename : draft-ietf-dnsop-glue-is-not-optional-00.txt > Pages : 5 > Date : 2020-06-03 > > Abstract: > The DNS uses glue records to allow iterative clients to find the > addresses of nameservers that live within the delegated zone. Glue > records are expected to be returned as part of a referral and if they > cannot be fitted into the UDP response, TC=1 MUST be set to inform > the client that the response is incomplete and that TCP SHOULD be > used to retrieve the full response. >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
