> On Sep 11, 2024, at 09:22, Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email protected]> wrote: > > In the current registry for Extended DNS Error Codes (RFC 8914), there > are codes that may be interesting to add: > > * One to say that the response was deliberately minimal (RFC 8482)
Certainly. I used to have code that prepared to ask for ANY, if that would not be honored, the code would then ask for each type of interest. Knowing whether to fallback was a pain without an explicit signal. > * One to say that the response comes from a local root (RFC 8806) Certainly. Could point to someone having a stale copy, resulting in the wrong IP address being hit for a next-level down. > * One to say that the response has been tailored because of ECS (RFC > 7871) [the most useful, IMHO] Question - I certainly can see why knowing a response is tailored is useful, but does it matter why? I.e., would this return code be only for tailoring due to ECS? Would a different return code be needed for other tailoring reasons (like DNS load balancing/traffic mgmt)? It is useful to know if a response is tailored when debugging someone else’s report - realizing that the answer the debugging individual gets is different is on purpose, vs. some other sort of accident of maybe time. > I am thinking about asking for a registration. Policy for this > registry is "first come, first served". Before I start sending email > to IANA, I ask your advice. Is it a good idea? Will the authors of > resolver / authoritative software use it? > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
