Subject: Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-hall-qtype-addr-00.txt]

From: "Eric A. Hall" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 23:20:48 -0500

on 8/14/2002 8:17 PM Paul Vixie wrote:

>> Are partial answers acceptable (as with a cache that has temporarily
>> lost external connectivity)?
>
> this depends on the setting of RRD and whether iteration is being done.
> if iteration is being done because the authority server is known not to
> handle QDCOUNT>1, then any SERVFAIL causes the underlying QDCOUNT>1
> question to be answered with SERVFAIL.  temporary loss of connectivity
> signals SERVFAIL.

I realized the error condition about five minutes later, and was wondering
if I'd get pants'd for it. Thanks for keeping the faith alive.

Here is the scenario I want to trip:

  client asks for A, AAAA and MX
  server has A cached
  server has AAAAA NODATA cached
  server has no information about MX and can't/won't go get it

It is possible that the server would have learned A and AAAA through some
other means (such as glue data, although this doesn't really work with the
NODATA part), while also refusing to fetch the MX RR.

Signalling the difference between NODATA and referral is pretty difficult,
since the client would interpret the referral as being applicable to both
AAAA and MX equally. This may be okay, since the only likely harm would be
a larger followup question. Tell me it's okay.

> i'll take that as an invitation to split EDNS1-old into EDNS1-current
> and EDNS2-current, where EDNS2-current will be all the stuff in
> EDNS1-old that's not directly competitive to QTYPE=ADDR.

You lost me. I'll read the new stuff and try to catch up.

-- 
Eric A. Hall                                        http://www.ehsco.com/
Internet Core Protocols          http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/

--
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/>