On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 9:57 AM, Dave Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote: > I personally am of the belief that yes, if the request has an OPT then > a responder can include an option code that was not in the request. > At least I don't see anything in 6891 to prohibit it. This is > behaviour that draft-ietf-dnsop-extended-error is also expecting.
I agree that signaling is important, and i also believe that if there's an OPT in the request, we can safely assume that the client would not choke on this option. I'm torn on the question whether or not stale data should be served (without signaling, in that case) when the request does *not* contain an OPT request. Probably we should err on the side of *not* serving stale when a client is not "EDNS capable", because that would mean no change from current behaviour. Alex _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
