[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Note 2.1.1.b was Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dnsext-axfr-clarify-06.txt
Title: Re: Note 2.1.1.b was Re: I-D
ACTION:draft-ietf-dnsext-axf
At 16:04 -0800 1/22/08, David Conrad wrote:
>Waking up from my nap...
>
>On 1/22/08 3:10 PM, "Edward Lewis"
<Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz> wrote:
>> The issue about whether it MUST be 0 or is something else
is
>> comlicated by the fact that it has changed in the registry
([IANA])
>> and we don't know why.
>
>Eh? What registry?
Referring to "bit 9"
http://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-header-flags,
#DNS Header Flags per [RFC1035]
#------------------------------
#In DNS query header there is a flag field in the
#second 16 bit word in query from bit 5 through
#bit 11 (RFC1035 section 4.1.1)
#
#
#bit 5 AA Authorative
Answer
[RFC1035]
#bit 6 TC Truncated
Response [RFC1035]
#bit 7 RD Recursion
Desired [RFC1035]
#bit 8 RA Recursion
Allowed
[RFC1035]
#bit 9
Reserved
#bit 10 AD Authentic
Data
[RFC4035]
#bit 11 CD Checking
Disabled [RFC4035]
I admit that it doesn't say [IANA] there, but I can say this is
where the false memory got in my head:
From: http://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-parameters
#Domain System Operation Code:
#
#OpCode
Name
References
#------
----
----------
# 0
Query
[RFC1035]
# 1 OpCode Retired (previously
IQUERY - No further [RFC3425]
# assignment of this
code available)
# 2
Status
[RFC1035]
# 3
reserved [IANA]
...
With a reread, maybe the only "mistake" in the IANA
registry is that the "bit 9" should still read:
bit 9 Z Reserved
[RFC1035]
And I need to reword out the "Z bit" because Z referred
to 3 bits "reserved for future use" in RFC 1035.
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward
Lewis +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar
Think glocally. Act confused.