RPZ and negative answers

[Phil Mayers]

On 04/04/2013 12:50 AM, Chris Buxton wrote:

> Thanks for the explanation. It seems to me this is a gap in coverage
> of RPZ -- the algorithm should be updated, in my opinion, to cover
> the case of a negative answer.

AIUI it's a deliberately limited mechanism aimed at preventing 
resolution of harmful domains; NODATA/NXDOMAIN rewriting has caused 
enough controversy in the recent past that I can understand there being 
reluctance to extend RPZ to do it.

Can you comment on the use-case?