Fwd: comp-protocols-dns-std: alex at alex.org.uk post needs approval

Peter Losher Peter_Losher at isc.org
Sun Oct 17 17:21:18 UTC 2004 

-- 
Peter_Losher at isc.org | ISC | OpenPGP Key E8048D08 | "The bits must flow"

-- Attached file included as plaintext by Ecartis --
-- File: forwarded message
-- Desc: ISC Mailing List Manager <ecartis at isc.org>: comp-protocols-dns-std: alex at alex.org.uk post needs approval

Return-Path: <ecartis at isc.org>
X-Original-To: plosher at farside.isc.org
Delivered-To: plosher at farside.isc.org
Received: from sf1.isc.org (mx-1.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:0:2::1c])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by farside.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B13FC677E3
	for <plosher at farside.isc.org>; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:15:19 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from ecartis at isc.org)
Received: from rc3.isc.org (rc3.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:bb::25])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by sf1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36EA62851A
	for <plosher at farside.isc.org>; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:15:19 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from ecartis at isc.org)
Received: from rc3.isc.org (rc3.isc.org [204.152.187.25])
	by rc3.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BEE65C8D9
	for <Peter_Losher at isc.org>; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:15:18 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from ecartis at isc.org)
X-Original-To: comp-protocols-dns-std-moderators at isc.org
Delivered-To: comp-protocols-dns-std-moderators at rc3.isc.org
Received: from rc3.isc.org (rc3.isc.org [204.152.187.25])
	by rc3.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCEE35C8DA
	for <comp-protocols-dns-std-moderators at isc.org>; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:15:17 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from Peter_Losher at isc.org)
Received: from isc.org by isc.org (ECARTIS/1.0.0);
	Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:15:17 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:15:17 +0000 (UTC)
From: ISC Mailing List Manager <ecartis at isc.org>
Reply-To: alex at alex.org.uk
To: comp-protocols-dns-std-moderators at isc.org
Message-ID: <ecartis-10152004201517.46135.1 at isc.org>
X-ecartis-antiloop: isc.org
Precedence: list
Subject: comp-protocols-dns-std: alex at alex.org.uk post needs approval
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64 (2004-01-11) on farside.isc.org
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DONT_DELETE autolearn=no 
	version=2.64
Content-Type: 
X-UID: 6256
X-Length: 6485

This message was received for a list you are a moderator on, and
was marked for moderation due to the following reason:
Non-member submission to closed-post list.

To approve this message and have it go out on the list, forward this to
comp-protocols-dns-std-repost at isc.org

If you wish to decline the post, change the 'apppost' below to 'delpost'.
If you wish to edit the post, change it to 'modpost' and edit the message
as needed - not all mail programs will work with modpost.

DO NOT DELETE THE FOLLOWING LINE.  Ecartis needs it.
// apppost 41702FD5:B437.1:pbzccebgbpbyfqaffgq

>From owner-namedroppers at ops.ietf.org  Fri Oct 15 20:15:17 2004
Return-Path: <owner-namedroppers at ops.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: comp-protocols-dns-std at rc3.isc.org
Delivered-To: comp-protocols-dns-std at rc3.isc.org
Received: from sf1.isc.org (mx-1.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:0:2::1c])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client did not present a certificate)
	by rc3.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1103A5C8D9
	for <comp-protocols-dns-std at rc3.isc.org>; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:15:16 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from owner-namedroppers at ops.ietf.org)
Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by sf1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id EF0C92851A; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:15:15 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from owner-namedroppers at ops.ietf.org)
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.41 (FreeBSD))
	id 1CIYLZ-000EtI-Hn
	for namedroppers-data at psg.com; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:06:41 +0000
Received: from [195.82.114.197] (helo=shed.alex.org.uk)
	by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.41 (FreeBSD))
	id 1CIYLY-000Esz-Lh
	for namedroppers at ops.ietf.org; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:06:40 +0000
Received: from [192.168.100.25] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by shed.alex.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 65FE9C2DA9; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 21:06:39 +0100 (BST)
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 21:06:36 +0100
From: Alex Bligh <alex at alex.org.uk>
Reply-To: Alex Bligh <alex at alex.org.uk>
To: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker at verisign.com>,
	namedroppers at ops.ietf.org
Cc: Alex Bligh <alex at alex.org.uk>
Subject: RE: I-D ACTION:draft-iab-dns-choices-00.txt
Message-ID: <41C1931FFF182259217229B9@[192.168.100.25]>
In-Reply-To: <C6DDA43B91BFDA49AA2F1E473732113E010BEC8F at mou1wnexm05.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
References: <C6DDA43B91BFDA49AA2F1E473732113E010BEC8F at mou1wnexm05.vcorp.ad.v
 rsn.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.5 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64 (2004-01-11) on psg.com
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham 
	version=2.64
Sender: owner-namedroppers at ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk



--On 15 October 2004 12:38 -0700 "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" 
<pbaker at verisign.com> wrote:

> *   The current wildcard, if www.example.com exists the
>     wildcard *.example.com will NOT match for ANY record.
>
> *?  The wildcard people think they have and mostly want,
>     TXT/*.example.com will match iff www.example.com exists
>     but has no other TXT record.
>
> As a matter of history quite a few DNS servers have actually
> implemented the nonstandard *? wildcard which is one reason
> for the confusion.
>
> The use cases given in the MARID case did not work, in particular
> is was not possible to construct a wildcard to say 'this machine
> does not send mail' since *.example.com will not match
> phill.example.com if there is ANY record for the node. The
> use case is real but it cannot be met without *? style wildcards.

Does the latter (*?) actually need any protocol-level specification?

By which I mean is it not possible to
a) On a strictly conformant server, emulate *? with a macro (or similar),
   so
    *? IN TXT foo
    a IN TXT bar
    b IN MX baz
   becomes
    * IN TXT foo
    a IN TXT bar
    b IN MX baz
    b IN MX bar
b) If one wants to implement a server where * means "the other thing",
   i.e. *? (and you note some servers have done this), say "* in a zone
   file means *?" (and preferably provide a way to get *).

Alex

--
to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request at ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>
// eompost 41702FD5:B437.1:pbzccebgbpbyfqaffgq




-- Attached file included as plaintext by Ecartis --

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQBBcqogPtVx9OgEjQgRAjXlAKCRuF6Hu+x5lAEtLuB9LJNX9VCnzQCcD7/d
zAsC5I63Y/pX61Exp7y2/yA=
=Q4np
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

More information about the bind-users mailing list