> On Feb 26, 2016, at 5:02 PM, Warren Kumari <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> For implementations that treat "positive" and "negative" cache entries >>>> separately, perhaps the document should say whether a validated proof of >>>> non-existence should be considered "positive" or "negative." > > > I think that implementations which treat "positive" and "negative" > cache entries separately have made an implementation choice, and it is > not our place to say which cache they should go in, merely the > behavior that we want. I suspect that that is what you are asking for? >
I probably should've phrased it differently. I was thinking about RFC 2308 "Negative Caching of DNS Queries (DNS NCACHE)" which talks about caching of negative responses versus positive responses. So your draft may want to clearly state whether the type of caching that it proposes should be treated as a negative or a positive response. I can see a good case being made for either. Or maybe it doesn't matter much and, as you say, the implementor can choose. Perhaps this document would even need to state that it updates RFC 2308 in in some way? DW _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
