[dns-operations] The strange case of fox.com

[Mark Andrews]

In message <20160228213043.GA3247 at sources.org>, Stephane Bortzmeyer writes:
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 07:54:57PM +0100,
>  Florian Weimer <fw at deneb.enyo.de> wrote 
>  a message of 30 lines which said:
> 
> > Both BIND and Unbound do not seem to copy very well with this (in
> > the sense that future queries fail after the NS query for some
> > time).
> 
> So, it may break with QNAME minimisation?

Yes.  It also isn't a big deal that lookups fail when that happens.
Gun, foot, shoot.

Note: this should have been caught by the registry when it is
checking the delegation as per RFC 1034.  Registries have two sets
of customers and failing to perform the checks is doing a disservice
to *both* sets of customers.

Mark
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka at isc.org