Op 23-02-15 om 15:15 schreef Ray Bellis:
On 23 Feb 2015, at 14:06, Willem Toorop wil...@nlnetlabs.nl wrote:
Maybe this document can give a decisive answer on the expansion of AXFR
as well? In the RFC Editor Abbreviations List (
On 23 Feb 2015, at 13:00, Hosnieh Rafiee hosnieh.raf...@huawei.com wrote:
Hello,
Is there any single document for all DNS terms to be used as a reference in
order to avoid defining them in a document. The terms I am looking for is all
general DNS terms -- authoritative name server,
Thanks,
Are section 6 and 7 an alternative drop in replacement for section 4 and
5? Because I feel there are some pieces missing in section 7 about
server policies and how that works out in responses, that can be found
in section 5.
Sections 7.2.3 (Only a CLIENT Cookie) and 7.2.4.1 (A Client
Hello,
Is there any single document for all DNS terms to be used as a reference in
order to avoid defining them in a document. The terms I am looking for is all
general DNS terms -- authoritative name server, resolver, client, host, etc.?
Thanks,
Best,
Hosnieh
Hosnieh Rafiee hosnieh.raf...@huawei.com wrote:
Is there any single document for all DNS terms to be used as a reference
in order to avoid defining them in a document.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hoffman-dns-terminology
Tony.
--
f.anthony.n.finch d...@dotat.at http://dotat.at/
The relevant RFC, 5936, says that the mnemonic means Authoritative Transfer,
both in the abstract and introduction.
--Paul Hoffman
___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
Asynchronous makes no sense to me. In what way is an AXFR asynchronous?
Authoritative transfer? As opposed to what? Non-authoritative transfer?
Authoritative seems rather redundant in that phrase -- AXFRs are always
comprised of authoritative data, aren't they?
The reference to full zone
On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Mark Delany f...@november.emu.st wrote:
On 15Feb15, Paul Hoffman allegedly wrote:
secretary hat on
On Feb 15, 2015, at 4:49 AM, Suzanne Woolf suzworldw...@gmail.com wrote:
The WG adopted this document some time ago (the announcement to the list
is dated
Apologies to everyone for it having taken so long to address your comments.
I'm finally going through and trying to capture and incorporate comments.
Because we've taken so long to release an updated draft, making sure
we are capturing all the points if a bit tricky. In order to try avoid
having
