In message <[email protected]>, Fernando Gont writes:
> Hi, Mark,
> 
> Thanks so much for your input Comments in-line...
> 
> On 10/11/2015 09:25 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> > 
> > Lots of the content is pertanent today.  Look at the treatement of
> > DNS packets in todays firewalls.
> > 
> > It took years to get EDNS packets larger then 512 bytes through
> > most firewalls by default.  Some still block packets bigger than
> > 512 bytes.
> [....]
> 
> Question: Has all of this been summarized somewhere?

Parts of it show up in EDNS compliance failures graphs at
<https://ednscomp.isc.org/compliance/summary.html>.  There
are server level reports the last compliance run at
<https://ednscomp.isc.org/> as well as a online tester.

draft-andrews-dns-no-response-issue also talks about parts
of it.

> If not, it would seem that it would be desirable to explicitly include
> all this evil behavior in e.g. the forthcoming "advice" document.
> 
> Thoughts?

Perhaps.  Pointing out badness is the first step to getting it
fixed.
 
> Thanks!
> 
> Best regards,
> -- 
> Fernando Gont
> SI6 Networks
> e-mail: [email protected]
> PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
> 
> 
> 
> 
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: [email protected]

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

Reply via email to