On Sat, Jul 01, 2017 at 02:40:43PM -0700,
internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote
a message of 45 lines which said:
> Title : DNS Terminology
> Authors : Paul Hoffman
> Andrew Sullivan
> Kazunori Fujiwara
> File
Hello Ted and Tom,
I'm going to reply to both of you at once.
First of all, I'm not going to push for wire format change any longer.
Your replies show that there is a lot of thoughts behind the document
*but* these are not captured in the document itself nor dnsop mailing
list. (Maybe I'm just i
I have a question related to RFC2317 "Classless IN-ADDR.ARPA delegation."
Earlier this year, I switched from a class C bank of 256 addresses to
a reduced set of 32 ips (/27). To get PTR queries to work, RFC2317
was referred by my ISP to prepare the delegation.
Having implemented RFC2317, I
On 24.8.2017 16:21, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 01, 2017 at 02:40:43PM -0700,
> internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote
> a message of 45 lines which said:
>
>> Title : DNS Terminology
>> Authors : Paul Hoffman
>> Andrew Sulliva
Hello.
On 08/24/2017 05:46 PM, Hector Santos wrote:
> [...] Not expecting this in my DNS resolver code, I modified the
> resolver to take the CNAMEs into account and return the host names
> instead. Was this the correct thing to do, thus providing the same
> results regardless of the query locati
This is why rfc 2308 definition of qname is correct.
On August 24, 2017 9:46:58 AM MDT, Hector Santos wrote:
>I have a question related to RFC2317 "Classless IN-ADDR.ARPA
>delegation."
>
>Earlier this year, I switched from a class C bank of 256 addresses to
>a reduced set of 32 ips (/27). To g
On 08/24/2017 09:46 AM, Hector Santos wrote:
Not expecting this in my DNS resolver code, I modified the resolver to
take the CNAMEs into account and return the host names instead. Was
this the correct thing to do, thus providing the same results regardless
of the query location?
This is one
RFC 2308 is consistent with RFC 1034.
Go read *all* of RFC 1034. QNAME is used to refer to *both* the original
*and* updated value after following a CNAME.
Mark
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org
We might want to invent a new term here like effective qname, but basically I
agree with Mark. 2308 was written after bind itself learned the distinction.
On August 24, 2017 3:27:34 PM PDT, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
>RFC 2308 is consistent with RFC 1034.
>
>Go read *all* of RFC 1034. QNAME is used
Honestly, I think the part of RFC 1034 (Section 4.3.2) that says "change QNAME
to the canonical name in the CNAME RR, and go back to step 1" is just treating
the string "QNAME" as a variable in a loop. One will note that the analogous
portion of the *resolver* algorithm (5.3.3) says "change the
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 8:00 PM, Darcy Kevin (FCA) wrote:
> Honestly, I think the part of RFC 1034 (Section 4.3.2) that says "change
> QNAME to the canonical name in the CNAME RR, and go back to step 1" is just
> treating the string "QNAME" as a variable in a loop. One will note that the
> analog
11 matches
Mail list logo
