Hi Andrew, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > > That still leaves open the question of whether the stub resolvers > > can assume, as many have apparently been doing for years, that they > > will be given CNAME before A. ... > but I don't think there's any promise anywhere about what order the > RRsets come in. Therefore any client that is depending on an order > has made a mistake.
I don't know if you went back to the ieft list and read this thread's conversation there, but my stance is I also don't think it's stated anywhere, but stub resolvers seem to vary in the assumptions they make and it should therefore be stated more precisely. Further, given the large number of stub resolvers that won't get fixed, but continue to be in service, the statement should perhaps legitimise their assumptions so as many as possible of them become compliant. They've effectively gone and created a de facto bit of the standard. Cheers, Ralph. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
