On 24/07/12 14:30, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
Why? I mean other than a knee-jerk reaction to that behavior not (yet)
being documented in an RFC somewhere? I mean for practical purposes why
is what they are (or rather, could be, assuming my suggestion about what
they could be doing is correct) doing necessarily bad?
The obvious implication of that behaviour is lots of DNS packets to IPs
around the world that may not be (probably *are* not) running a DNS server.
Based on the numbers coming in and out of my own resolvers (which aren't
even that busy), suffice to say I think that traffic would be at best
problematic, and at worst harmful.
I can think of a bunch of ways this might cause problems, but frankly I
lack the energy to get into a discussion about it. Maybe others are more
interested ;o)
DNS is well-specified in the RFCs.
Sure. So there is no room for expansion?
Absolutely. I look forward to the internet draft ;o)
In all seriousness, I don't dismiss that the behaviour *could* be
useful. I just think that, in general, sending unsolicited requests to
unknown IP addresses, on a well-known protocol/port is sub-optimal.
_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe
from this list
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
