[dns-operations] Karl Auerbach on adding 'millions' more TLD - what do folks think about the operational impact?
paul at vix.com
Tue Jan 9 22:52:40 UTC 2007
> >> 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.")
More information about the dns-operations