Really, cancel culture. It’s a couple of lines of code in a nameserver to support QCOUNT=0. It will take more time debating this than it took to implement support for QCOUNT=0.
> On 19 Jan 2024, at 00:22, Joe Abley <jab...@strandkip.nl> wrote: > > On 18 Jan 2024, at 13:42, Petr Špaček <pspa...@isc.org> wrote: > >> The only piece missing to make it *perfect* is "MUST use QDCOUNT=1", or in >> other words, banning QDCOUNT=0 usage with DNS COOKIES. It's unnecessary >> complexity. > > I think these are two different suggestions: > > (1) Update the cookies spec to require QDCOUNT = 1 too > > (2) Apply a definitive restriction on QDCOUNT for all future opcodes, > imagined or otherwise. > > I would prefer (1) to happen in a different document if is to be done, since > there are cookies-specific conservations to be discussed and I don't think it > would make the current document clearer to go through them all here. There > are also different operational considerations based on what currently does or > doesn't happen in the wild. > > I'm not sure what I think about (2), at least partly because I'm always wary > about predicting the future. > > > Joe > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
