Allow-Query=any

[Reindl Harald]

Am 07.01.2016 um 22:31 schrieb Warren Kumari:
> Reindl, did you read the draft referred to in the HINFO? (
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any/ ). It
> clearly outlines the reasons that cloudfare is doing this. This document
> was discussed in the DNSOP WG, and was presented at a few meetings.
> The consensus within the DNSOP WG was to adopt and work on the draft, so
> I object to your characterization of this as "another clueless idiot
> degrading services" at a large company.
> Olafur and Joe (the authors of this) are far from clueless idiots.
> In addition, please try to moderate your tone - people come to the BIND
> Users list for assistance - your argumentative (and often insulting)
> posts are not helpful to building a community

i did read and understand the reasoning long before this thread as i 
also had the RRL patches in production long before they went to stable 
releases 
http://www.tummy.com/blogs/2013/02/20/bindrrl-patched-rpms-available/

with RRL and "minimal-responses yes;" the response size/impact of a ANY 
query is very limited while that is a completly different reasoning than 
"I don't want display all info"

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/attachments/20160107/d1e51d50/attachment.bin>