Ah that makes sense. I am not going to worry about the inconstancy then. Thanks to everyone that replied!!
-Grant On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Doug Barton <do...@dougbarton.us> wrote: > On 12/3/14 10:07 AM, Grant Ridder wrote: > >> Did more digging and found the RFC regarding ANY queries: >> >> 3.2.3 - * 255 A request for all records >> https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1035.txt >> > > When listing URLs for RFCs it's better to use the tools site, as it gives > a much better experience: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1035 > > Meanwhile, the text is correct, but what you're missing is the nuance of > authoritative vs. recursive. If you send an ANY query to an authoritative > server it is naturally going to send you all of the related records, since > it has them all. > > A recursive (or iterative if you prefer) server only has what it has in > the cache, but it will send you "all records" that it has. What this does > not imply is that the recursive server will go out and do its own ANY query > for the RR you're asking about, unless there is nothing in the cache to > start with. > > There are any number of explanations for why some of the recursive servers > you're querying have more records than others. None of them are bugs. :) > > However Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_DNS_record_types) >> lists this as a request for "All cached records" instead of "A request for >> all records" per the RFC. >> > > Wikipedia is good for a lot of things, but standards work is not one of > them. :) The text above is a good example of why. > > Doug > >
