On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 1:56 PM Richard Gibson
wrote:
> Copied from https://github.com/each/draft-aname/issues/54 per Tony Finch.
>
> The current draft specifies
>
> > We treat missing address records (i.e. NXDOMAIN or NODATA) the same
> > successfully resolving as a set of zero address records, a
Copied from https://github.com/each/draft-aname/issues/54 per Tony Finch.
The current draft specifies
We treat missing address records (i.e. NXDOMAIN or NODATA) the same
successfully resolving as a set of zero address records, and distinct
from "failure" which covers error responses such as SE
Vladimír Čunát wrote:
>
> I can't even see a simple way of detecting this. At least in the
> implementation suggested by Jan where you have an authoritative that
> calls out to a resolver (which calls out to authoritatives...)
You could prevent the loop from leading to a circular dependency, rat
If an implementation has a resolver, then that component is the logical
place for deduplication (e.g., the second inbound query for a given
ANAME target does not result in a second outbound query, but rather
waits on completion of the first).
On 4/9/19 11:15, Vladimír Čunát wrote:
On 4/9/19 3
On 4/9/19 3:38 PM, Richard Gibson wrote:
> This loop is one reason of several to eliminate inline resolution for
> ANAME if possible and minimize it otherwise, but is not quite as bad
> as it seems because all involved servers can—and should—avoid issuing
> queries that are redundant with an alread
This loop is one reason of several to eliminate inline resolution for
ANAME if possible and minimize it otherwise, but is not quite as bad as
it seems because all involved servers can—and should—avoid issuing
queries that are redundant with an already-active request. But even if
they don't, the
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 5:54 PM Tony Finch wrote:
> WRT loop detection, it is much easier if the additional section in the
> response from the resolver contains the chain(s). The draft doesn't
> specify that at the moment; maybe it should.
I meant a situation where an authoritative server is doing
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 : Algorithm Implementation Requirements and Usage
Guidance for DNSSEC
Authors : Paul Wouters
On Fri, 5 Apr 2019, Bob Harold wrote:
I'm a little surprised that this is going for PS rather than BCP,
which seems like it would reflect the recognized need for recurring
updates to the guidance given.
Personally, it seems a PS feels like it has a little more weight. Not
jus
On Mon, 8 Apr 2019, Alissa Cooper wrote:
Peter, thanks for your review. I entered a Yes ballot and pointed to your
review.
Indeed, thanks for the review Peter!
I've incorporated all of your suggestions, with the exception of:
Page 4, Section 1.3: In general, it would be nice if there were
10 matches
Mail list logo
