On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 7:43 PM, Havard Eidnes wrote:
> My parent says that the NS for exmple.com are ns1.example.com, ns2.
> example.com , but I (example.com) say that my NS are ns1.example.com, ns2.
> example.com *and* ns3.example.com. I don't (personally) think that this
> is a lame
> My parent says that the NS for exmple.com are ns1.example.com,
> ns2.example.com , but I (example.com) say that my NS are ns1.example.com,
> ns2.example.com *and* ns3.example.com. I don't (personally) think that this
> is a lame delegation. Do others?
Nope. Given this information, this is
>>"A lame delegation is said to exist when one or more authoritative
>>servers designated by the delegating NS RRset or by the child's apex
>>NS RRset answers non-authoritatively [or not at all] for a zone".
>>
>> ... without the "or not at all" part (so, an answer is required for
>>
On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 12:14 PM, Peter Thomassen wrote:
> On 5/2/23 17:52, Joe Abley wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 11:09, Peter Thomassen mailto:On
> Tue, May 2, 2023 at 11:09, Peter Thomassen <> wrote:
>
> If one of the NS answers non-authoritatively, then it doesn't serve a
> proper NS
On Mon, 01 May 2023 21:15:29 +
Joe Abley wrote:
> Yes -- some people (not me) would evidently describe a server that
> they didn't receive a response from as lame.
Lots of people and organizations tend to talk about "types" or "ways"
in which a server or delegation is lame. Here are a few
On 5/2/23 17:52, Joe Abley wrote:
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 11:09, Peter Thomassen mailto:On Tue, May 2, 2023
at 11:09, Peter Thomassen <> wrote:
If one of the NS answers non-authoritatively, then it doesn't serve a proper NS
RRset, so it's not possible for that server's response to agree /
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 11:09, Peter Thomassen <[pe...@desec.io](mailto:On Tue,
May 2, 2023 at 11:09, Peter Thomassen < wrote:
> If one of the NS answers non-authoritatively, then it doesn't serve a proper
> NS RRset, so it's not possible for that server's response to agree / be
> identical
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 11:01, Paul Wouters <[p...@nohats.ca](mailto:On Tue, May
2, 2023 at 11:01, Paul Wouters < wrote:
> If all the parental NS records point to
> properly working nameservers, but the authoritative nameservers claim
> an additional NS record, I would also call the delegation
On 5/2/23 17:07, Peter Thomassen wrote:
On 5/2/23 17:04, Paul Wouters wrote:
My preferred definition is the one originally given by Paul Vixie, amended by
myself, and further amended by Peter Thomassen:
A lame delegation is said to exist when one or more authoritative
servers designated
On 5/2/23 17:04, Paul Wouters wrote:
My preferred definition is the one originally given by Paul Vixie, amended by
myself, and further amended by Peter Thomassen:
A lame delegation is said to exist when one or more authoritative
servers designated by the delegating NS rrset or by the
On Tue, 2 May 2023, Frederico A C Neves wrote:
On Mon, May 01, 2023 at 04:43:11PM +, Wessels, Duane wrote:
My preferred definition is the one originally given by Paul Vixie, amended by
myself, and further amended by Peter Thomassen:
A lame delegation is said to exist when one or more
On Tue, 2 May 2023, Peter Thomassen wrote:
This, so far, was my understanding of the definition that was given in the
other thread, and which Benno labeled (2) in the original post of this
thread:
"A lame delegation is said to exist when one or more authoritative
servers designated by
Paul Vixie writes:
> > There I fixed it for you:
>
> that's a meme, right?
Yes, it was a joke. Apologies if it offended you in any way.
My point was to indicate that:
1. There are multiple (mis)understandings of what a lame delegation is
(regardless of whether or not the original
On 5/1/23 23:22, Paul Vixie wrote:
to be a lame _delegation_ means some error or misconfiguration in the server.
normally this means it's supposed to be authoritative but the zone expired or
the operator forgot or similar.
This, so far, was my understanding of the definition that was
On Mon, May 01, 2023 at 04:43:11PM +, Wessels, Duane wrote:
> My preferred definition is the one originally given by Paul Vixie, amended by
> myself, and further amended by Peter Thomassen:
>
> A lame delegation is said to exist when one or more authoritative
> servers designated by the
Hi all,
I think one of the problems are that we look at the term from different
perspectives.
For me "lame delegation" is a log messages from the resolver software.
A lot of the comments are more from the human view and with different
operational angles or potential end user experience.
16 matches
Mail list logo
