Re: in support of axfr-clarify

[gson@nominum.com (Andreas Gustafsson)]

D. J. Bernstein writes:
> The BIND company's ``clarification'' does two things:
> 
>    * It requires _servers_ to use the careful _server_ strategy. I have
>      no objection to this: it's what servers are already doing, it is
>      necessary for interoperability with careless clients, and it
>      removes a frivolous source of variability in the protocol.
> 
>    * It prohibits _clients_ from using the careful _client_ strategy. I
>      object to this: it is _not_ consistent with the installed base, and
>      it is _not_ necessary for interoperability.

We have been over all this before.  At the risk of repeating myself:

What you say is true, but it is a rather selective view of the truth.
As far as I know, the client behavior specified in the draft is
consistent with the entire installed base with the sole exception of
djbdns.  Although it is not necessary for interoperability of the base
protocol, it is necessary in order to support protocol extensions that
send out-of-band data in sections other than the answer section, such
as TSIG signed transfers.

I also wouldn't use the word "careful" to describe the indiscriminate
conglomeration of data from arbitrary sections of the response, but
I suppose that is a matter of taste.
-- 
Andreas Gustafsson, gson@nominum.com

--
to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>