Query on ignoring additional section returned in replies

Reindl Harald h.reindl at thelounge.net
Wed Nov 18 15:51:38 UTC 2015

Am 18.11.2015 um 16:47 schrieb Barry Margolin:
> In article <mailman.2958.1447847777.26362.bind-users at lists.isc.org>,
>   Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net> wrote:
>> when a result looks like below it needs to be fixed and "Are there any
>> BIND specific workarounds?" is the wrong question becaus even if - the
>> domain owner is not in the position to place workarounds somewhere else
> While that's the pedantically correct answer, in practice it doesn't
> work well when your users complain "Google DNS deals with it, why don't
> you?" Your users don't care what happens to people somewhere else, they
> just want to get their work done.

the pedantically correct answer would have been "if you can't convince 
your DNS operator that something is wrong fire him and seek for somebody 
with a clue what he is doing which implies running tools like the quoted 

> Google understands that there are lots of broken DNS configurations out
> there, but their users don't want to hear that it's someone else's fault

the users shouldn't take notice of such config bugs at all because it 
should not last for longer than a few hours until get proactive fixed

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/attachments/20151118/0af603d9/attachment.bin>

More information about the bind-users mailing list