On Thu, 16 Feb 2023 at 01:14, Masataka Ohta <[email protected]> wrote:
>8 > > So, there is no specification to mention queries with QDCOUNT>1, > either informatively, optionaly or normatively. > > Then, 3425 titled "Obsoleting IQUERY" updated 1035. > > As such, after 3425, QDCOUNT nomatively must always be 1. > The last statement is informatively and normatively mistaken. The counterexample is to be found in RFC8490(5.4): A DSO message begins with the standard twelve-byte DNS message header [RFC1035] with the OPCODE field set to the DSO OPCODE (6). However, unlike standard DNS messages, the question section, answer section, authority records section, and additional records sections are not present. The corresponding count fields (QDCOUNT, ANCOUNT, NSCOUNT, ARCOUNT) MUST be set to zero on transmission. Dick Franks ________________________ _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
