On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 10:04:06AM -0400, Joe Abley wrote:
> If client behaviour is not supposed to change when you return
> an extended RCODE, why bother returning one?
It's clearly helpful for human debugging.
But, yes, you're correct -- diagnostic information included with a
SERVFAIL is about
In your previous mail you wrote:
> But, yes, you're correct -- diagnostic information included with a
> SERVFAIL is about as trustworthy as the AD bit, and in the absence of an
> authentication mechanism such as TSIG, clients should not rely on it or
> base policy on it.
=> TSIG can be in a
The DNSOP WG has placed draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale in state
Candidate for WG Adoption (entered by Tim Wicinski)
The document is available at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-tale-dnsop-serve-stale/
___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://
