william manning <chinese.apri...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thursday, 25 August 2016, Tony Finch <d...@dotat.at> wrote: > > > william manning <chinese.apri...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > > > I'm with Ed here, A valid response is silence. > > > > I think it is important for people producing and deploying DNS server > > software and DNS-interfering middleboxes to understand the bad > > consequences of dropping queries or responses. If you understand these > > effects and still think you can improve things by dropping packets, then > > maybe go ahead. But it isn't a simple valid / invalid binary choice. > > Where does the "badness" occur? The server or resolver?
Both. The resolver suffers extra latency; the server suffers extra traffic - even a well-behaved resolver has to retry in this situation. > The rational for a server to silently ignore a query often revolves > around malformed queries ... Should a server attempt to answer > malformed queries or silently drop them? See section 7 of the draft. It would be reasonable to rate-limit responses. This kind of nuance is what this draft should discuss. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch <d...@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/ - I xn--zr8h punycode Trafalgar: In southeast, cyclonic, mainly easterly 6 to gale 8. In northwest, northerly or northeasterly 5 or 6, occasionally 7 later. Moderate or rough. In southeast, showers. In northwest, thundery showers. In southeast, moderate or good. In northwest, good occasionally poor. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
