Variations on lame delegations (terminology question)

[Ladislav Vobr]

Mark_Andrews at isc.org wrote:
>>My understanding of a "lame delegation" is that a listed nameserver for 
>>a zone is not authoritative for that zone.
>>
>>What terminology is/should be used if the listed nameserver isn't 
>>a nameserver?  I.e. if it isn't and never does run a DNS nameserver?
>>
>>And what if the NSDNAME of the NS record points to either a completely 
>>non-existant node, or that node has no address records (A or AAAA)?
> 
> 
> 	They are all lame delegations.

hmm but for some reasons, isc bind lame-ttl option has a different 
opinion, and considers server to be lame only in the first case :-(,

Ladislav

> --
> Mark Andrews, Internet Software Consortium
> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: Mark.Andrews at isc.org
>