Subject: RE: bis inconsistency: grandparent problem

From: "Scott Rose" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:16:14 -0400

>From my reading, Section C.8 talks about DS queries, but Section 4.2 talks
about finding the name servers (NS set) to ask in order to get the DS RRset
you are really looking for.

If I am looking for the DS RR of foo.example.com., I need to know the NS of
example.com. first, then ask for "foo.example.com. IN DS".

Scott.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked]
> [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Samuel Weiler
> Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 1:48 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: bis inconsistency: grandparent problem
>
>
> -protocol section C.8 suggests using explicit DS queries to get around
> the grandparent problem.  Section 4.2 of the same document suggests
> using NS queries.  These are worded as suggestions, not instructions;
> there's no 2119 language here.
>
> 1) Do we know that NS queries work?  (No wierd caching
>    effects, no confusion over authoritative v. glue NSset?)
>
> 2) Should the doc be changed to be self-consistent?
>
> -- Sam
>

--
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/>