On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 2:01 PM, 神明達哉 wrote:
> At Mon, 25 Apr 2016 21:39:32 +0200,
> Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>
> > Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote
> > a message of 17 lines which said:
> >
> > > > Title : NXDOMAIN really means there is nothing
> underneath
> > > > Author
Yes, that's my recollection as well. We've been working on some version
or another of this draft for kind of a long time, and that's why the
current document is as neutral as it is. I think that neutrality really
does represent wg consensus, not in the sense that everybody is neutral,
but that
On 5/9/16, 2:15 PM, "DNSOP on behalf of 神明達哉" wrote:
>At Fri, 6 May 2016 14:59:12 -0400,
>Ted Lemon wrote:
>
>> > While a reverse mapping is generally useful for informational
>> > purposes, some people use it even more aggressively, such as for
>> > access control or host validation
At Fri, 6 May 2016 14:59:12 -0400,
Ted Lemon wrote:
> > While a reverse mapping is generally useful for informational
> > purposes, some people use it even more aggressively, such as for
> > access control or host validation based on the existence of a
> > reverse mapping, and often also
At Mon, 25 Apr 2016 21:39:32 +0200,
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote
> a message of 17 lines which said:
>
> > > Title : NXDOMAIN really means there is nothing
> > > underneath
> > > Authors : Stephane Bortzmeyer
> > >
At Mon, 09 May 2016 19:46:01 +0900 (JST),
fujiw...@jprs.co.jp wrote:
> >> >When aggressive use is enabled, regardless of description of
> >> >Section 4.5 of [RFC4035], it is possible to send a positive response
> >> >immediately when the name in question matches a NSEC/NSEC3 RRs in the
> From: 神明達哉
>> > - Abstract: I suggest revising this on this point (see above):
>> >
>> >responses as well as some level of mitigation of random sub-domain
>> >attacks (referred to as "Water Torture" attacks).
>> >
>> > by either simply removing it or clarifying that it's mitigation for
