On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 09:34:06PM -0400, John Levine wrote: > > Also, you're the only person who's commented directly and that makes > > me think the WG isn't going to do much review of it > > Sheesh, it's a national holiday in the US and UK today. Some of us > were out having picnics.
My apologies for being unclear. My point was rather that the draft is about to expire, and Joe and I created it entirely to draw away the debate of how referrals _should_ happen from the terminology document. Tht was what I meant by "the only person". As someone who can barely manage to cope with emails at a 1 week interval any more, I'm hardly likely to complain people don't get back the same day; but I do apologise that wasn't clear. > I like it because I like anything that makes the DNS simpler. I'd > make the advice clearer, authoritative servers that want to > interoperate MUST refuse out of zone requests. This is an interesting suggestion. > I'd also like to consider offering clearer advice on what do do when a > recursive server gets an authoritative query. Is there any situation > other than misconfiguration or testing when that would happen? Are we > doing anyone a real favor by returning anything other than REFUSED? You mean, when a server that is not authoritative for anything nevertheless gets a query with RD==0? I think that's fine. How else do you debug a cache? A -- Andrew Sullivan [email protected] _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
