In message <20140218234946.10461.qm...@f5-external.bushwire.net>, "Mark Delany" writes: > On 19Feb14, Mark Andrews allegedly wrote: > > The process for getting a new type hasn't been *hard* for a decade > > now. > > > > Nameserver developers have been deploying new types quickly for > > over a decade now. > > > > Recursive servers have had the bugs w.r.t. handling unknown types > > removed over a decade ago. > > Apart from the web-panels I'd say that the biggest bugbear is CPE such > as DSL/cable modems. Having conducted some experiments recently, my > observation is that some of these** have pretty atrocious cache/proxy > implementations. I had to drop the idea of using PTR for a particular > application because one implementation of dnsproxy assumes that PTR is > only ever valid in in-addr.arpa space (it had plenty of other bugs > too, but that's another story). > > I see now that some newer CPE defaults to 8.8.8.8 - at least that > eliminates the local implementation bugs...
And I would have gone ahead and implemented it as Autralian Consumer Law requires a product to be fit for purpose and this modem clearly wasn't. The retailer need to refund or replace at the consumers discression. Once these !#!@$ boxes get sent back there will be supply chain presure to fix the problems. > Mark. > > ** The irony won't be lost on you, Mark, that your neighbours are > probably running with that bug since I found it in a popular DSL > modem sold in Australia/SE Asia. > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
