> On 12 Aug 2020, at 10:25, Ben Schwartz
> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 6:18 PM Tony Finch wrote:
> Ben Schwartz wrote:
> ...
> > In this procedure, "all returned records" for follow-up queries are added
> > to the Additional section. Therefore, there could be SOA records in the
> >
ncement from Afilias:
http://www.circleid.com/posts/20200811-afilias-to-protect-tlds-against-potential-orphan-glue-exploits/
Afilias has informed registrars and registry clients that it is
taking steps to remove orphan glue records from 200+ TLD zones
in its care. This will eli
Ben Schwartz wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2020, 5:51 PM Brian Dickson
> wrote:
> >
> > I think the condition might be, "both in bailiwick and in the same zone"
> > meaning "in bailiwick and not below a zone cut"?
I don't think that makes sense - "bailiwick" is about glue. Maybe you
could say "in the
Ben Schwartz wrote:
>
> > > If the server does not complete this procedure (e.g. due to response size
> > > limits), it MUST remove any SOA records from the Additional section.
> > > Recursive resolvers MAY use the presence of an SOA record in the
> > > Additional
> > > section to enable negative
On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 2:38 PM Ben Schwartz wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 4:54 PM Tony Finch wrote:
>
>> Ben Schwartz wrote:
>> >
>> > 1. If TargetName is not in-bailiwick and is not ".", terminate the
>> procedure.
>> > 2. If SvcPriority is 0:
>> > * If TargetName is ".", terminate
Ben Schwartz wrote:
>
> 1. If TargetName is not in-bailiwick and is not ".", terminate the procedure.
> 2. If SvcPriority is 0:
> * If TargetName is ".", terminate the procedure.
> * Otherwise, perform a SVCB "follow-up" query for TargetName and add all
> returned records, including
, or the registry breaking
registrar B stuff).
You may have seen Afilias announcement yesterday about glue records
(as a consequence of the discussion here maybe?), with a public version
at
http://www.circleid.com/posts/20200811-afilias-to-protect-tlds-against-potential-orphan-glue-exploits/
It
