[dns-operations] Reporting glue as authoritive data -- Bug!
eperea at walkereng.com
Wed Jan 30 20:34:57 UTC 2008
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 09:10:37AM -0500, Edward Lewis wrote:
> At 9:47 +1100 1/30/08, Mark Andrews wrote:
> The point that seems to be getting lost is not that hybrid answers
> are produced but that there are resolvers that need it. I received a
> bit more detail on our (Ultra's) experience. The behavior as it is
> now dates back to last century, a few years ago a fix was put in
> place. The result was the production network got hammered due to a
> resolver bug, so it was backed out. The problem today is that we
> have been unable to verify that adding the fix back in wouldn't
> repeat the situation.
It would be nice to have more details of the "hammering" that took
place. I don't doubt that there are lots of buggy resolvers out there,
but not knowing any details it seems presumptuous to assume that the
problem MUST be with ResolverX rather than Ultradns. If it could be
shown that ResolverX has the same problem with (e.g.) BIND 9, your claim
that there are resolvers that need hybrid answers (and that they need to
be catered to) would be much easier to accept.
Right now all you seem to be saying is that without hybrid answers an
(unnamed) resolver is a PITA for Ultradns. I'm sure that's true, but
it's still a bug in Ultradns isn't it? What am I missing?
More information about the dns-operations