Ed Lewis wrote:

> (Only if you like reading history:)
   
> The reason was a flaw in "certain old resolvers" that followed the "upwards 
> referral" to the root that 
> the "predominate server code of the time" had decided to use for lameness..  
> The result was a lot of 
> resolver stuck in an infinite loop, hitting the root servers.  I.e., this was 
> an operational issue.  The 
> solution was updating and redeploying the buggy code, not stamping out lame 
> servers (which was 
> the goal of the task).  FWIW, the "upwards referrals" were discontinued when 
> it became apparent 
> they were being used in noticeable amplification attacks.
  
I sat on the front lines of ARIN’s war against lame delegations for the entire 
war.  We spent quite a few
years testing delegations for our definition of lameness, and then notifying 
the listed tech-c and admin-c.
E-mail recipients would either ignore the email, not understand the email and 
move on to the next thing,
or would write-in or call-in and speak to either me or my co-worker Jon Worley. 
Very few lame delegations
were fixed, even among those who called-in or wrote-in for clarification.  rDNS 
worked for the user, and
they weren’t willing to change anything.

The war was unwinnable. 
    
/david 

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Reply via email to