On Thu, 10 May 2001, Jim Reid wrote: > Mark> Send it a non-recursive query. A nameserver should > Mark> always answer even if it is just a header containing > Mark> refused, servfail or notimp. > > Yes, but there is one notorious DNS implementation that doesn't do > that. It fails to return any answer -- not even a referral for . -- if > it's asked for a name that it isn't authoritative for. Then it isn't responding, in its true sense. Our control mechanisms of DNS delegations should not try to handle all buggy servers. In that case the error message will be "timeout" instead of "non-authoritative answer". Mats ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mats Dufberg +46-8-545 857 06 [EMAIL PROTECTED] fax: +46-8-545 857 29
- Re: Should a nameserver know about itself? Bill Woodcock
- Re: Should a nameserver know about itself? bert hubert
- Re: Should a nameserver know about itself? Nathan Jones
- Re: Should a nameserver know about itself? Mark . Andrews
- Re: Should a nameserver know about itself? Robert Elz
- Re: Should a nameserver know about itself? Mans Nilsson
- Re: Should a nameserver know about itself? James Raftery
- Re: Should a nameserver know about itself? Bruce Campbell
- Re: Should a nameserver know about itself? Mark . Andrews
- Re: Should a nameserver know about it... Jim Reid
- Re: Should a nameserver know abou... Mats Dufberg
- Re: Should a nameserver know abou... Peter Koch
- Re: Should a nameserver know abou... Sam Trenholme
- Re: Should a nameserver know about itself? bert hubert
- Re: Should a nameserver know about itself? Robert Elz
- Re: Should a nameserver know about it... Bruce Campbell
- Re: Should a nameserver know abou... Sam Trenholme
- Re: Should a nameserver know abou... Mans Nilsson
- Re: Should a nameserver know abou... Jim Reid
- Re: Should a nameserver know abou... Mats Dufberg
- Re: Should a nameserver know abou... Kenneth Porter
