On 27 Oct 2011, at 12:06, Havard Eidnes wrote: > Hi, > > I wonder if I could please have someone say whether they agree > with me on this one: > > I've come across a configuration "in the wild" where a given zone > 'z' contains both > > a.z. NS some.name.server. > > *and* > > sub.a.z. NS some.other.name.server.
are some.name.server and some.other.name.server really different servers? Different instances of name server software(not only different IP addresses)? > > and where the owner of 'a.z' could not understand why they have > trouble controlling the data registered at the 'sub.a.z' name. > > My claim is that it is a "Registry Error" for the operator of the > registry for the 'z' domain to permit this to happen, as it > violates the basic idea of what a "delegation" means. > > Implementations appear to be slightly inconsistent in whether > they expose or hide the sub.a.z. "delegation", a sample shows: > > NSD 3.2.8 exposes > BIND 9.7.0-P2 hides > BIND 9.7.3-P1 hides > BIND 9.8.0-P4 exposes > ironDNS 1.0.1 exposes > > I'm a little surprised that BIND apparently has regressed on > this... > > "The actual names have been withheld to protect the guilty." > > Regards, > > - Håvard > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
