hmm.... not the answer I was hoping for but clear and final... I've been interpreting http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1035.html and guessed that QDCOUNT could have been used that way.
will look for alternative solutions. Thanks a lot guys for the quick reply. fede On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 11:52 PM, Michael Sinatra < mich...@rancid.berkeley.edu> wrote: > On 12/29/10 14:06, Alan Clegg wrote: > >> On 12/29/2010 2:17 PM, Federico Barbieri wrote: >> >>> Not sure if this is the right place to ask but I've been trying to dig >>> around and found nothing... >>> >>> reading the dns specification it would seems possible to send multiple >>> request in a single packet. >>> >> >> I'm not sure what the actual reference is, but "don't do that". >> >> Nobody supports it (what would the answer section contain? what does >> the RCODE actually mean?)... >> > > I believe it's in the EDNS1 specification that Paul did a while back, after > EDNS0. I don't think it ever got advanced to RFC: > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dnsext-edns1-03 > > See especially section 4. > > The answer to your question on RCODE: > > > 4.2. RCODE and AA apply to all RRs in the answer section having the > > QNAME that is shared by all questions in the question section. AA > applies to all matching answers, and will not be set unless the exact > original request was processed by an authoritative server and the > response forwarded in its entirety. > > michael > _______________________________________________ > bind-users mailing list > bind-users@lists.isc.org > https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users >
_______________________________________________ bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
