In message , Florian Weimer
writes:
> On 04/27/2017 11:31 AM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> > If you want to advocate for changes to behaviour that is fine, but
> > advocate for that. Just saying "shouldn't the rcode be NOERROR"
> > isn't doing that. Then there is DNSSEC. If the target zone is
> > sig
On 04/27/2017 11:31 AM, Mark Andrews wrote:
If you want to advocate for changes to behaviour that is fine, but
advocate for that. Just saying "shouldn't the rcode be NOERROR"
isn't doing that. Then there is DNSSEC. If the target zone is
signed and DO=1 is set in the query should you include th
In message
, =?UTF-8?B?SmFuIFbEjWVsw6Fr?= writes:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 1:04 AM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> >
> > In message com>
> > , =?UTF-8?B?SmFuIFbEjWVsw6Fr?= writes:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> sorry for resurrecting this thread, but this really caught my attention.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 1:04 AM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> In message
>
> , =?UTF-8?B?SmFuIFbEjWVsw6Fr?= writes:
>> Hello,
>>
>> sorry for resurrecting this thread, but this really caught my attention.
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 9:03 AM, Peter van Dijk wrote:
>> > On 5 Apr 2017, at 7:43, Mukund S
On 27/04/2017 08:40, Petr Špaček wrote:
> Other people already commented on semantics so I will focus on message
> format:
>
> My attempts to find reasoning for the new TLV format in archives did not
> yield an elaborate explanation. Assuming I did not miss anything, it
> seems to me that the c
On 21.3.2017 20:34, Jan Komissar (jkomissa) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have one comment for this draft. In Section 3.3 Message Format, I would
> prefer that if a Session Signaling message is received where any of the
> section count fields are not zero, the receiver MUST respond with an error
> code, e
