Re: qname minimization: me too :(

On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 10:42 AM Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > > Jun 25 16:18:31 conr named[4725]: lame-servers: > >info: success resolving 'bar.foo.isc.org/A' after disabling > >qname minimization due to 'ncache nxdomain' > > I do not see how this is possible ("success resolvi

Re: qname minimization: me too :(

On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 04:41:54PM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: ! On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 04:22:40PM +0200, ! Peter wrote ! a message of 16 lines which said: ! ! > Jun 25 16:18:31 conr named[4725]: lame-servers: ! >info: success resolving 'bar.foo.isc.org/A' after disabling !

Re: qname minimization: me too :(

On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 04:22:40PM +0200, Peter wrote a message of 16 lines which said: > Jun 25 16:18:31 conr named[4725]: lame-servers: >info: success resolving 'bar.foo.isc.org/A' after disabling >qname minimization due to 'ncache nxdomain' I do not see how this is pos

Re: qname minimization: me too :(

On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 07:00:51AM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote: ! It’s just a false positive when the result is NXDOMAIN. Because > people forget to put delegating NS records in parent zones when both > are served by the same server the lookups continue on NXDOMAIN. There > is an issue to address thi

Re: qname minimization: me too :(

On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 10:32:37PM +0200, Peter wrote a message of 40 lines which said: > In other words: why do You guys no longer talk to each other? We do but talking is one thing, convincing is another one, and making people act is a third :-( -- Visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listi

Re: qname minimization: me too :(

I should add that a resolver should be able to stop on the first NXDOMAIN. It’s only because we know there are mis-implementations of the protocol (returning NXDOMAIN rather that NOERROR for empty non-terminals) and mis-configurations (missing delegating NS records) that the default is to cont

Re: qname minimization: me too :(

It’s just a false positive when the result is NXDOMAIN. Because people forget to put delegating NS records in parent zones when both are served by the same server the lookups continue on NXDOMAIN. There is an issue to address this. -- Mark Andrews > On 25 Jun 2024, at 06:36, Peter wrote: >

Re: qname minimization: me too :(

On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 04:58:55PM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: ! On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 07:03:14AM +, ! 65;6800;1c Michael Batchelder wrote ! a message of 59 lines which said: ! ! > You'll need to fix these zones so that the response is NOERROR rather than NXDOMAIN. ! ! Yes and, if

Re: qname minimization: me too :(

On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 07:03:14AM +, 65;6800;1c Michael Batchelder wrote a message of 59 lines which said: > You'll need to fix these zones so that the response is NOERROR rather than > NXDOMAIN. Yes and, if you want the whole context, you can read RFC 8020

Re: qname minimization: me too :(

On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 07:03:14AM +, Michael Batchelder wrote: ! > Yes, sure. I grabbed three typical cases to analyze further, and ! > currently trying to understand the proceedings - unsuccessfully, up ! > to now. :( ! > ! > Case 1: ! > --- ! > Jun 19 17:42:12 conr named[24481]: lame-se

Re: qname minimization: me too :(

> Yes, sure. I grabbed three typical cases to analyze further, and > currently trying to understand the proceedings - unsuccessfully, up > to now. :( > > Case 1: > --- > Jun 19 17:42:12 conr named[24481]: lame-servers: >info: success resolving '26.191.165.185.in-addr.arpa/PTR' >

Re: qname minimization: me too :(

On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 10:33:41PM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: ! On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 10:15:48PM +0200, ! Peter wrote ! a message of 32 lines which said: ! ! > today I happened to look into a named.log, and found it full of ! > qname minimization messages. ! ! Which message? Could

Re: qname minimization: me too :(

On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 10:15:48PM +0200, Peter wrote a message of 32 lines which said: > today I happened to look into a named.log, and found it full of > qname minimization messages. Which message? Could you copy-and-paste it? -- Visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users t

qname minimization: me too :(

Hi all, today I happened to look into a named.log, and found it full of qname minimization messages. Now as far as I understand, the saying goes that this is a problem of misconfigured upstream nameservers and we cannot do much about it. But, what if these "misconfigured upstream servers" happ