dig ignores +notcp when doing IXFR (DiG 9.5.0-P2)

[Mark Andrews]

In message <2E1626BE-94F8-44E8-A73C-6521C44BA448 at conundrum.com>, Matthew Pounsett writes:
>
> On 2013-12-05, at 01:37 , Mark Andrews <marka at isc.org> wrote:
>
> >
> >>> Note, named will for the use of TCP in its UDP response.
> >
> > 	s/for/force/
>
> Always? Regardless of response size?  Interesting.  What's the rationale
> for doing it that way?

Because TCP is always checksummed.  UDP isn't.

-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka at isc.org