Hello Steinar,
> if I query without the "Recursion Desired" flag, the flag is still set in the reply
Thanks for that. Ill remove it.
(I don't see in the RFC that it shouldnt be allowed to include it, but it doesnt make any sense)
> There are multiple problems ... https://ednscomp.isc.org/ednscomp
We do not have any plans to implement EDNS today, so I just wanted to make sure EDNS-clients don't break compability.
I was notified that rfc6891/edns require format error and empty response when NOT supporting EDNS, so it just looked like a catch 22 compared to the original dns rfc which got me a bit confused.
At 08:08 10/05/2019 (UTC), sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
> (I am the author of the mentioned dns software)
>
> According to RFC1034, including the request in the response seem to be
> required. Is there something I am misunderstanding here ?
There are multiple problems with p4.no, and you can see it with the
ISC EDNS compliance tester:
https://ednscomp.isc.org/ednscomp
Note that there are more problems than those related to EDNS handling.
For instance, if I query without the "Recursion Desired" flag, the flag
is still set in the reply, which shouldn't happen:
% dig +norec +noad +noedns soa p4.no @213.179.58.78
...
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 45201
;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 5
This is the first test that the ISC EDNS compliance tester shows as
failing for p4.no.
Steinar Haug, AS2116
_______________________________________________ Pdns-users mailing list Pdns-users@mailman.powerdns.com https://mailman.powerdns.com/mailman/listinfo/pdns-users
