On Jul 4, 2020, at 3:58 PM, Paul Vixie <p...@redbarn.org> wrote: > > On Thursday, 2 July 2020 14:50:24 UTC John R Levine wrote: >> >> Well, maybe. Even if you got one A record there might be others. > > no. truncation is on RRset boundaries. even in a truncated response, RRsets > are never broken up. if you have any A records for a name, you have them all.
This draft only quotes from RFC 1034, an RFC in which the word "truncation" does not appear. In fact, the word "fit" doesn't appear in this sense either. RFCs 1035 and 2181 give mixed messages about incomplete RRsets. That is, it is easy to quote one part and say "see, this proves what I said" for different values of "what I said". As I said earlier in this thread, this seems like to be the wrong draft in which to fix the vagueness about full RRsets. --Paul Hoffman
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
