[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


To: dnssec@cafax.se
From: Miek Gieben <miekg@atoom.net>
Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 14:51:18 +0200
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20040510175721.662ED42B2@thrintun.hactrn.net>
Mail-Followup-To: dnssec@cafax.se
Sender: owner-dnssec@cafax.se
User-Agent: Vim/Mutt/Linux
Subject: Re: dnssec: resolver - application communication

[On 10 May, @19:57, Rob wrote in "Re: dnssec: resolver - applica ..."]
> > On Monday 10 May 2004 9:23 am, Miek Gieben wrote:
> > >...
> > > This essentially leads to the case whereby every application will do it's
> > > own validation. When you are validating DNSSEC data, it is very handy to
> > > directly talk to the authoritative server. Thus this, in turn, will lead to
> > > increased pounding on the authoritative servers on the Internet. Most
> > > notably the secure entry points, which will be root in some future. In
> > > short: this will most probably break the DNS.
> > 
> > I'm not sure I agree here.  Why would validating stub resolvers (a term I'm 
> > using for the "application") wish to talk directly to the authoritative 
> > servers?
> 
> In particular, what does the validating stub resolver need from the
> authoritative name servers that it can't get via recursive name
> servers by setting the CD bit?

Nothing, I now think everything can be done by toggling the CD bit.

thanks, 
Miek

Home | Date list | Subject list