Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > draft-ietf-dnsop-respsize-15.txt says: > >> will automatically requery for RRSets that are possibly truncated > > I don't think that a RRset can be "possibly truncated". Either it is > truncated (not sent in its entirety) and the TC bit is set, the > resolver does not have to guess, or it is not truncated. There is > never an ambiguity. (Unless you use "truncation" in the sloppy sense I > criticized above.)
are you advising (by implication) that a receiver who hears TC=1 with ANCOUNT>0 or NSCOUNT>0 or ADCOUNT>0 treat it as a FORMERR?
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
