* Gaurav Kansal:
> As root DNS are running in anycast so number is not an issue at all. But I
> don't understand where exactly is this limitation exists???
The limitation does not exist, otherwise it would not have been possible
to add IPv6 addresses to the priming response.
--
Florian Weimer
r, 2011 12:14 PM
> To: Gaurav Kansal
> Cc: bind-us...@isc.org
> Subject: Re: Reason for Limited number of Root DNS Servers
>
>
> In message <004c01cca034$259d4870$70d7d950$@nic.in>, Gaurav Kansal writes:
> >
> > Dear All,
> >
> >
> >
> >
Mark Andrews [mailto:ma...@isc.org]
Sent: Friday, 11 November, 2011 12:14 PM
To: Gaurav Kansal
Cc: bind-us...@isc.org
Subject: Re: Reason for Limited number of Root DNS Servers
In message<004c01cca034$259d4870$70d7d950$@nic.in>, Gaurav Kansal writes:
Dear All,
Somewhere I read that number
There is more than 13 physical root servers but these servers have only 13
domain names (a-m.root-servers.net) and ip addresses. Only 13 because of
limitation of single DNS message to 512 bits (RFC 1035).
http://root-servers.org -- List and map of the root servers
Dnia 11 listopada 2011 6:38 Gaur
y, 11 November, 2011 12:14 PM
To: Gaurav Kansal
Cc: bind-us...@isc.org
Subject: Re: Reason for Limited number of Root DNS Servers
In message <004c01cca034$259d4870$70d7d950$@nic.in>, Gaurav Kansal writes:
>
> Dear All,
>
>
>
> Somewhere I read that number of ROOT
In message <004c01cca034$259d4870$70d7d950$@nic.in>, Gaurav Kansal writes:
>
> Dear All,
>
>
>
> Somewhere I read that number of ROOT DNS servers is limited to 13 because of
> protocol limitation of DNS and UDP.
>
> Exact writing was "A combination of limits in the DNS and certain
> protoco
On Nov 11, 2011, at 1:38 PM, Gaurav Kansal wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> Somewhere I read that number of ROOT DNS servers is limited to 13 because of
> protocol limitation of DNS and UDP.
> Exact writing was “A combination of limits in the DNS and certain protocols,
> namely the practical size of u
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 11:08:31AM +0530, Gaurav Kansal wrote:
> As root DNS are running in anycast so number is not an issue at all. But I
> don't understand where exactly is this limitation exists???
Prior to EDNS(0), DNS packets transmitted over UDP couldn't be more
than 512 bytes in length. M
8 matches
Mail list logo