ignored glue

[James Raftery]

On Tue, Oct 03, 2000 at 02:08:42PM +0000, John F Carr wrote:
> 1. Is this required by the RFCs?  RFC 2181 5.4.1 says that the address
> in this case is in the least trustworthy category of data, but only
> requires that it not be returned as an answer.  There seems to be no
> prohibition on using the address other than as an answer.

Good ideas don't necessarily have to be required by RFCs to be good
ideas :)

> 2. Would there be any security problem if named did forward the request
> to address 1.2.3.4?  If the server were going to lie, it could just as
> easily give a false domain name in the NS record.

As a properly delegated-to nameserver for the zone it is quite entitled
to announce any information from that zone - after all, that's its
function. But when it announces information from another zone it steps
outside its area of responsibility.

> 3. Do other nameservers act the same?  When did this feature
> get added to BIND?

dnscache, from djbdns, does, FWIW.

Regards,

james
-- 
James Raftery (JBR54)  -  Programmer Hostmaster  -  IE TLD Hostmaster
   IE Domain Registry  -  www.domainregistry.ie  -  (+353 1) 706 2375
  "Managing 4000 customer domains with BIND has been a lot like
   herding cats." - Mike Batchelor, on dns at list.cr.yp.to.