I was testing TSIG with a well known key against TLD servers and got the
following response. Once you get past the bad class field (reported to the
operator) there were a
number of other items:
* the tsig name does not match the request.
* the algorithm doesn’t match the algorithm in the
At Thu, 13 Sep 2018 17:25:04 +0200,
"Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)" wrote:
>>> I'm wondering if it would make sense to provide stronger guidance that
the
>>> conventional ANY response SHOULD be provided if TCP is used as TCP
already
>>> provides a retrun routability proof...? Also maybe provide a
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations WG of the IETF.
Title : DNS Terminology
Authors : Paul Hoffman
Andrew Sullivan
Hi Olafur,
please see below.
> Am 13.09.2018 um 00:02 schrieb Ólafur Guðmundsson :
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 11:27 PM, Mirja Kühlewind wrote:
> Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any-07: Yes
>
> When responding, please keep the
Hello.
On 9/12/18 7:57 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> One of the things that people said they wanted in 7706bis is more > example
> configurations for different systems.
In Knot-resolver we decided to support an alternative approach:
aggressive caching with a module that keeps the root zone fresh in
