Subject: [dnsext] hopefully axfr-clarify-10 will appear soon

From: Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 12:21:03 -0500

Yesterday I assembled a pile of notes, printed messages relating to 
the topic and got all set to start editing it this morning.  Yep, 
left all the paper at work.

I addressed most of the topics I could recall.  If I left one out, 
which I'll look for when I get back to the pile of paper, I'll add it 
sooner or later.

I'm crossing my fingers regarding the new automated ID submission 
process.  Still have my doubts about technology.

One open question...raised by Alfred...

What is done about old servers that put one RR per message into AXFR 
responses?  How does this play with the words about complete RR sets?

>(15)  Section 3.1
>
>I have not seen precise answers to my question regarding
>the granularity of responses (old AXFR servers sending only one RR
>per AXFR response message violate the principle of only putting
>entire RRsets into DNS response messages).

-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis
NeuStar                    You can leave a voice message at +1-571-434-5468

Never confuse activity with progress.  Activity pays more.

--
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: Mark Andrews <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2008 11:40:43 +1100

> responses?  How does this play with the words about complete RR sets?

	The answer is the set of messages which make up the AXFR
	response.  As long as the set of messages contains the
	complete RRset there is no problem.
 
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: [email-masked]

---

From: Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2008 11:52:00 -0500

Good answer.  I think somewhere I have a note that RRsets are to be 
kept together.  I'll make sure it says that they ought to be sent 
together but on receipt, it's all additive.  I bet that needs to me 
made more obvious.