Subject: Re: name server without root cache

From: Alexis Yushin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 11:31:49 +0200 (CEST)

Once bert hubert wrote:
>Before rushing off to what everybody 'thinks', please be so kind as to
>determine how recursors react to your thoughts. They are not going to change
>anytime soon [1].
>
>You do not want to see hammering retransmits but you also don't want a
>nameserver to declare you 'dead' or 'broken' and not sending other queries
>to you!

I agree, however a recursor should not have come to you with the stupid
query in first place. If the recursor got referred to you by your parent
(as it should be) it will ask you a questing you'd have an answer to.

If the recursor asked something silly first and got REFUSED, even though
you might get tagged as ``broken'' (why actually broken? rather unfriendly)
my best guess is that it will come talk to you again if it got referred
to you directly. And if not, well somebody else will do it for him.
(Hmm, is recursor really a him or a her, or could it be both? :)

>The data we have indicate that the world is happy with:
><QR=RESPONSE AA=0 RA=0 RCODE=NOERROR ANCOUNT=0 NSCOUNT=0 ADCOUNT=0>
>
>We've just switched TK. over to:
><QR=RESPONSE AA=0 RA=0 RCODE=SERVFAIL ANCOUNT=0 NSCOUNT=0 ADCOUNT=0>
>
>And that also appears to go down well. I'm not going to try 'REFUSED'
>though.

You might want to though (see my previous mail). It would give everybody
here a very valuable otherwise unattainable input!

Alexis

--
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/>

---

From: bert hubert <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 11:40:08 +0200

> (as it should be) it will ask you a questing you'd have an answer to.

We mostly send out these packets for domains that have been delegated to us
but not yet entered in the database. So those queries aren't stupid. 

> here a very valuable otherwise unattainable input!

I'll see what happens but not on the TK. rootservers. 'Refused' might be
interpreted as 'I'm not talking to your IP address'. So who knows what might
happen.

The world is screaming for RCODE=NotAuth. I'll also try to measure how many
of our resolving clients proclaim EDNS0 compliance.

Regards,

bert

-- 
http://www.PowerDNS.com          Versatile DNS Software & Services
http://www.tk                              the dot in .tk
http://lartc.org           Linux Advanced Routing & Traffic Control HOWTO