Moin! On 1 May 2023, at 18:43, Wessels, Duane wrote:
> My preferred definition is the one originally given by Paul Vixie, amended by > myself, and further amended by Peter Thomassen: > > A lame delegation is said to exist when one or more authoritative > servers designated by the delegating NS rrset or by the child's apex NS > rrset answers non-authoritatively for a zone. > > I don’t think it is perfect, but it is an improvement. I don’t think > perfection will be achievable. > > IMO “[or not at all]” does not belong in the definition. I don’t think we > should allow timeouts to be confused for or considered as lame delegation. > > If something like the above definition is adopted then the document can note > there is some historical lack of agreement or consistency in use of the term. Fully agree. After all DNS still runs over UDP and packets are getting dropped anywhere in the network for different reasons, so confusing this with a clearly visible configuration error would be wrong. So long -Ralf ——- Ralf Weber _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
