On 10 Apr 2023, at 20:42, Mats Dufberg wrote:
Delegation is an entity consisting of a set of name servers and, in some cases, glue address records. One part of the delegation is to provide the path to the child zone content.
While this may be a convenient way to consider things in an administrative overview, it seems to me to mask operational reality. I have, or think I have, always understood the NS RRset at a zone cut to advertise a set of delegations, each to a distinct server.
For the *delegation* to be lame it is not enough for one name server to be “broken”. The entire set must be such that the path to the child zone content is not available.
I don't know about that. If I were to injure one leg, the remaining good one wouldn't eliminate my lameness.
For individual name servers it could be meaningful that say that it is a *lame name server* in relation to a certain zone.
I disagree. A delegation involves at least two parties. At one level, a delegation is a contract, or chain of contracts, between registrant and name-service provider. At another, it is an advertisement at a zone cut and a corresponding configuration of a server and its path to the public network. A lame delegation arises when these aspects (respectively contractual and operational) of the delegation are mismatched. I think that the term "lame name server" prejudices analysis towards one end of the relationship. 0,02 Niall
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
