Subject: Re: NSEC synthesis and the NSEC Next Domain Name field

From: Don Stokes <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 11:46:03 +1200

Robert Elz <[email-masked]> wrote:
>The "next" name in this sense from x.example would be \000.x.example
>not \001.x.example - or if you prefer, \000.x.example sorts between
>x.example and \001.x.example.

True -- and I was aware of that.  However, I'm also fully aware of the
fact that a heck of a lot of software out there is not as eight-bit
clean as one might imagine, especially as far as nuls are concerned. 
After all, nuls are so rare and library routines that deal with
nul-terminated strings so common that someone's eventually going to get
bitten where it hurts by that.

But yes, if one was codifying NSEC lies, one could use \000 and tell
everyone writing DNS software that has to deal with NSEC that this is
going to happen and they need to worry about it.

-- don

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>