h.reindl at thelounge.net
Thu Jan 7 21:40:38 UTC 2016
Am 07.01.2016 um 22:31 schrieb Warren Kumari:
> Reindl, did you read the draft referred to in the HINFO? (
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any/ ). It
> clearly outlines the reasons that cloudfare is doing this. This document
> was discussed in the DNSOP WG, and was presented at a few meetings.
> The consensus within the DNSOP WG was to adopt and work on the draft, so
> I object to your characterization of this as "another clueless idiot
> degrading services" at a large company.
> Olafur and Joe (the authors of this) are far from clueless idiots.
> In addition, please try to moderate your tone - people come to the BIND
> Users list for assistance - your argumentative (and often insulting)
> posts are not helpful to building a community
i did read and understand the reasoning long before this thread as i
also had the RRL patches in production long before they went to stable
with RRL and "minimal-responses yes;" the response size/impact of a ANY
query is very limited while that is a completly different reasoning than
"I don't want display all info"
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the bind-users