This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/

[dns-wg] TLD delegation trade-offs

• Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] TLD delegation trade-offs
• Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] TLD delegation trade-offs

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com
Tue Jun 7 17:55:30 CEST 2005

On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 11:50:39AM -0400, Edward Lewis wrote:
> At 15:47 +0000 6/7/05, bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
> 
> >	just for grins... how would DNSSEC "bend" around this
> >	supporting girder (or crutch if you prefer).
> 
> Having to know not to give up when seeing an unsigned answer coming 
> from a cache, treating this as a referral message and not a bogus 

	so... get back the unsigned rrset (glue) - then treat 
	as a referal & attempt to validate down its delegation chain...???

--bill

• Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] TLD delegation trade-offs
• Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] TLD delegation trade-offs

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

[ dns-wg Archives ]