On 11/7/25 18:50, Joe Abley wrote:
Addressing Mark's Concern
1. Do nothing, this is not a concern we should worry about. This kind of junk is all over
the DNS, it's already happening with the existing (described) other uses of hostname
".", not to mention misconfigurations where hostnames are used but do not
resolve properly; we are not going to eliminate all of these failure modes by doing
something different here.
[...]>
3. Change resolver behaviour. Resolver B SHOULD return a more useful signal than SERVFAIL, maybe with an EDE
or something. Resolver A SHOULD avoid retrying if it receives such a signal. This would avoid the behaviour
Mark is concerned about in this draft, but would also clean up other uses of the hostname ".". The
camel is slightly sad, but perhaps it's worth it to avoid the cost of retries for all the cases where
"." is used in place of a real hostname to mean "not provided".
I think both (1) and (3) are fine.
In case of (3), definitely SHOULD is appropriate, not MUST.
I don't think this is related to other uses of "." (such as in SOA MNAME or MX
target, because these names are not followed during resolution, but returned to the
client). And if the client subsequently tried to resolve those names, they'd just get
NODATA.
We should clarify that the root must remain without an address record.
Best,
Peter
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
