> On Mar 22, 2022, at 6:02 AM, Ralf Weber <d...@fl1ger.de> wrote:
>
> Moin!
>
> So to follow up on my comment in the working group on registries not having
> anything to do with it. I understand that this drafts is for authoritative
> name server implementers, however I think that we should make clear that an
> authoritative name server not answering correct by this draft might do so
> because it does not have sufficient data.
>
> So we currently have in the introduction:
>
> Note that this document only clarifies requirements of name server
> software implementations. It does not place any requirements on data
> placed in DNS zones or registries.
>
> how about adding:
>
> However missing data might make it impossible for a name server to answer
> with the correct (referral) glue data.
>
> And maybe add some encouragement or referral ;-) to work that has to be done
> elsewhere.
Ralf (and others),
how does this look to you?
In other words, this document only makes requirements on "available
glue records" (i.e., those given in a zone), but does not make
requirements regarding thier presence in a zone.
If some glue records are absent from a given zone, an authoritative
name server may be unable to return a useful referral response for
the corresponding domain. The IETF may want to consider a separate
update to the requirements for including glue in zone data, beyond
those given in [@!RFC1034] and [@!RFC1035].
Also here:
https://github.com/ietf-wg-dnsop/draft-ietf-dnsop-glue-is-not-optional/pull/35
DW
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
