Actually if you had read the followup this was not a
application error but a operator error. Operator errors
are exactly what this misbehaviour depends on. This a
perfectly good example of unexpected consequences.
Note this also breaks the expectations of RFC 1123
If a dotted-decimal number can be entered without such
identifying delimiters, then a full syntactic check must be
made, because a segment of a host domain name is now allowed
to begin with a digit and could legally be entirely numeric
(see Section 6.1.2.4). However, a valid host name can never
have the dotted-decimal form #.#.#.#, since at least the
highest-level component label will be alphabetic.
This implies that entering a address query for #.#.#.# will
NOT return a RRset.
except that resolver libraries routinely tack on a domain suffix before
sending the query. so the query isn't for #.#.#.#, it's for
#.#.#.#.some-domain.com. and this is actually part of the problem. in
my experience, earthlink's servers often (correctly) don't respond for
queries for a particular domain without the suffix, but do respond with
bogus RRs for queries that have the suffix tacked on. I'm not sure why
the servers act differently between the two cases, but I've seen it
happen enough to make me think there's a real correlation.
Keith
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf