Hi,
I'm just not sure if this requested SHOULD->MUST change would actually
have any consequences.
It still doesn't say anything about what authoritative, and recursive
servers should do.
The draft's sections about authoritative server behavior are somewhat
brief, but that may be OK.
In general, they tend to expect that the authoritative server passes
through any SVCB/HTTPS records without too much verification. Just check
syntax in order to be able to translate zonefile <--> wire format.
The semantic consistency seems to be expected only between the record
author and the client, which seems to be OK.
Libor
Dne 31. 10. 21 v 2:03 Mark Andrews napsal(a):
In AliasMode, records SHOULD NOT include any SvcParams, and
recipients MUST ignore any SvcParams that are present.
Today we had the following record like this
example.com IN HTTPS 0 . alpn=h2 ipv4hint=192.0.2.1 ipv6hint=2001:DB8:
interpreting this as described leads to “0 .” which indicates
NO SERVICE OFFERED. Rejecting this at load time would be much
safer but the weasel wording of "SHOULD NOT” makes this difficult.
Please make this MUST NOT.
Mark
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
