On 4 May 2018, at 05:59, Shane Kerr <sh...@time-travellers.org> wrote:
> I think that there may be something useful in creating a term when a > delegation only points to lame servers, thus cannot be resolved at all. > Perhaps "broken delegation"? One thing that I think has been missing from much of this conversation (but not all) is the idea that the vantage point matters when determining if a server is lame for a particular zone [1]. Just because from my vantage point I can't get responses from any of the nameservers cited in a referral response doesn't mean that my experience is universal. Some of the servers might be reachable in other routing domains; some servers might be blocking my queries due to some transient network problem that affects just a subset of its potential clients, or because addresses near me have been participating in an attack, etc, etc. I am wary of any description that implies that there is some simple measure of lameness that is universal. Joe [1] the grammar also seems to vary between opinions. Is a server lame for a domain? Or for a particular query? What do we mean by server, in the case where a single instance of nameserver software running in a single compute environment responds to multiple addresses, e.g. is dual-stacked? _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
