strange response to the DS request

Manabu Sonoda manabu-s at
Mon Mar 7 00:58:46 UTC 2016

On Fri, 4 Mar 2016 10:49:50 -0800
神明達哉 <jinmei at> wrote:

> I'm not sure whether we should do something about it, though.  As you
> pointed out, the configuration is already so broken: there's even no
> delegation from the parent (or ancestor) to the child zone, so I'm not
> sure if we can define any valid behavior in such a case based on
> RFC3658 or any other standard document.
> So I'm wondering: is this something odd you just happen to find in a
> test environment or something, or is there any practical issue because
> of that?
That found product environment...
Our full resolver was sometimes return the CNAME record.
That parent zone TTL is greater than child zone TTL.

I known this is miss-configuration that NS Delegation.
Named-checkzone returns errors that parent zone includes ns rcodes for child.
and named can't load zonefile this case.

> --
> JINMEI, Tatuya

Manabu Sonoda <manabu-s at>
Internet Initiative Japan Inc.

More information about the bind-users mailing list