Paul Vixie wrote: > > If a DNS message is received on the wire, that has a compressed name in > > some RR's RDATA which it should not have (going by its type), is it fair > > to still accept it as a valid message and process it if the > > implementation is able to do so? i.e., can Postel's law be followed > > here, or must the implementation strictly reject such messages? > > i followed postel's law with regard to receipt of compressed names > anywhere in any RDATA that i knew the format of, in both BIND4 and > BIND8. the result was that implementations who wrongly compressed > non-well-known RDATA's (including BIND4 and BIND8) were able to > break that rule without pain. > > it's my strongly held belief that postel's law is wrong for RDATA > interpretation, and that the first implementation to compress > something they should not have compressed, should feel pain.
That would be good, yes, and it is allowed by 3597, but not required. -- Andreas Gustafsson, g...@araneus.fi _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
