[dns-operations] Karl Auerbach on adding 'millions' more TLD - what do folks think about the operational impact?

[Paul Vixie]

> >> 	All vendors should be supporting DNAME by now.  It's only been
> >> 	around 7 years (August 1999) on standards track.
> >
> > Microsoft does not. The hotfix for WinXP DNAME errors is to disable DNAME
> > handling.
> 
> To make it a bit more clear: Microsoft DNS-code can't serve DNAMEs and also
> can't resolve DNAMEs at all.

then it's in the position of having to consume the synthesized CNAMEs that
come along with every DNAME response.

> Since DNAME processing was enabled in W2KSP2, the DNS parser fails on every
> DNAME record and discards the whole packet.  That's why DNAMEs can't be
> resolved at all in W2K and WXP enviroments.

what a stupid idea.

> In short: Using DNAME in your zone ensures that your names are unreachable
> in networks running Microsoft DNS (the vast majority of companies).

then it's a staredown.  will the people using DNAME (and depending on 
implementations to either understand DNAME or consume synthetic CNAME)
blink first, or will microsoft?  ("let's let the market decide.")