A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations Working Group
of the IETF.
Title : DNS query name minimisation to improve privacy
Author : Stephane Bortzmeyer
On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 06:36:49AM -0800,
internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote
a message of 36 lines which said:
> Title : DNS query name minimisation to improve privacy
> Author : Stephane Bortzmeyer
> Filename: draft-ietf-dnsop-qname-minimisation-09
On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 12:27:33PM -0800,
internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote
a message of 39 lines which said:
> Title : The EDNS Key Tag Option
> Author : Duane Wessels
> Filename: draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-key-tag-00.txt
5.2.1 says: "If the client in
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 08:10:09AM -0800,
internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote
a message of 43 lines which said:
> Title : A review of implementation DNS over port 80/443
> Authors : Shane Kerr
> Linjian Song
> Run
A new meeting session request has just been submitted by Tim Wicinski, a Chair
of the dnsop working group.
-
Working Group Name: Domain Name System Operations
Area Name: Operations and Management Area
Session Requester: Tim Wicinski
Numb
Hi Stephane,
> On Jan 8, 2016, at 12:48 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 12:27:33PM -0800,
> internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote
> a message of 39 lines which said:
>
>>Title : The EDNS Key Tag Option
>>Author : Duane Wessels
>> Fil
Hi all
RFC3597 says this:
> Receiving servers MUST decompress domain names in RRs of well-known
> type, and SHOULD also decompress RRs of type RP, AFSDB, RT, SIG, PX,
> NXT, NAPTR, and SRV (although the current specification of the SRV RR
> in [RFC2782] prohibits compression, [RFC2052] mandated i
On Saturday, January 09, 2016 11:26:16 AM Mukund Sivaraman wrote:
>
> If a DNS message is received on the wire, that has a compressed name in
> some RR's RDATA which it should not have (going by its type), is it fair
> to still accept it as a valid message and process it if the
> implementation is
Paul Vixie wrote:
> On Saturday, January 09, 2016 11:26:16 AM Mukund Sivaraman wrote:
> >
> > If a DNS message is received on the wire, that has a compressed name in
> > some RR's RDATA which it should not have (going by its type), is it fair
> > to still accept it as a valid message and process i
