Different RPZ behavior for IDN domains between BIND 9.20.23 and 9.20.26

[Ondřej Surý]

What is the rule to trigger this? It is hard to debug without seeing the exact ruleset that’s being used.

Ondrej
--
Ondřej Surý (He/Him)
ondrej at isc.org

ADHD brain at work: I sometimes lose track of my inbox. Please feel free to send a gentle nudge if you're waiting on a reply!

My working hours and your working hours may be different. Please do not feel obligated to reply outside your normal working hours.

> On 24. 7. 2026, at 13:04, Sachchidanand Upadhyay via bind-users <bind-users at lists.isc.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I am observing different RPZ behavior for an IDN domain after upgrading from BIND 9.20.23 to 9.20.26 and would appreciate any guidance.
> 
> Environment:
> 
> BIND 9.20.23: Works as expected
> BIND 9.20.26: Fails
> The BIND configuration and RPZ configuration are identical on both versions.
> 
> The queried domain is an IDN. The domain itself is not present in the RPZ, yet BIND 9.20.26 logs an "RPZ QNAME rewrite failed" message for the query, while the same query is resolved successfully on BIND 9.20.23 using the same configuration. Below are the logs
> 
> 24-Jul-2026 15:37:16.288 query-errors: debug 3: client @0x7fd386c93800 <client_IP>#41889 (xn--i1bn6adp9emg4dcbcajdeflxp1gua1n7bt10abief.xn--11b7cb3a6a.xn--h2brj9c): view internal: rpz QNAME rewrite xn--i1bn6adp9emg4dcbcajdeflxp1gua1n7bt10abief.xn--11b7cb3a6a.xn--h2brj9c stop on qresult in rpz_rewrite(): failure
> 24-Jul-2026 15:37:16.288 query-errors: info: client @0x7fd386c93800 <client_IP>#41889 (xn--i1bn6adp9emg4dcbcajdeflxp1gua1n7bt10abief.xn--11b7cb3a6a.xn--h2brj9c): view internal: query failed (failure) for xn--i1bn6adp9emg4dcbcajdeflxp1gua1n7bt10abief.xn--11b7cb3a6a.xn--h2brj9c/IN/A at query.c:7651
> 24-Jul-2026 15:37:16.288 query-errors: debug 4: fetch completed for xn--i1bn6adp9emg4dcbcajdeflxp1gua1n7bt10abief.xn--11b7cb3a6a.xn--h2brj9c/A in 0.042000: failure/deadlock found [domain:xn--i1bn6adp9emg4dcbcajdeflxp1gua1n7bt10abief.xn--11b7cb3a6a.xn--h2brj9c,referral:1,restart:2,qrysent:4,timeout:0,lame:0,quota:0,neterr:0,badresp:0,adberr:0,findfail:0,valfail:4]
> 
> If anyone has encountered this issue before or is aware of a workaround or solution, I would be grateful for your suggestions.
> 
> Regards,
> Sachchidanand Upadhyay
> 
> 
> --
> Visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/attachments/20260724/753ce9ce/attachment.htm>