Clarity: it's not only Windows clients, but also Windows DNS servers
that are at issue here.
Bob, I'm actually at a loss on this. Windows clients aren't a big deal as
it's easy to write a DNS UDP client to query an arbitrary record type. But a
lack of support in the servers? I thought NT4 and Win2K DNS were tested as
compliant with RFC 3597 section 3 according to an earlier post.
Or am I missing something?
I know Roy only tested some things, but I was under the impression he tested
what MARID could potentially query of a compliant DNS server.
--
PGP key (0x0AFA039E):
<http://www.pan-am.ca/consulting(_at_)pan-am(_dot_)ca(_dot_)asc>
Sometimes it's hard to tell where the game ends and where reality bites,
er, begins. <http://vmyths.com/resource.cfm?id=50&page=1>
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ietf-mxcomp(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org
[mailto:owner-ietf-mxcomp(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org]On Behalf Of
roy(_at_)dnss(_dot_)ec
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 12:14
To: ietf-mxcomp(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
Subject: implementation compliance [RE: Reuse of TXT]
[snip]
COMPLIANT:
BIND 8 (>= version 8.3.0)
BIND 9 (>= version 9.1.0)
Microsoft NT DNS
Microsoft server 2000
Microsoft server 2003
Nominum ANS
Nominum CNS
TinyDNS
NSD (>= version 2.0.1)
PowerDNS (>= version 2.9.11)
MaraDNS [recursive only]
totd
dnscache
Net::DNS (>= version 0.44)