In <20040804104852(_dot_)GA9698(_at_)nic(_dot_)fr> Stephane Bortzmeyer
<bortzmeyer(_at_)nic(_dot_)fr> writes:
On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 05:32:07AM -0500,
wayne <wayne(_at_)midwestcs(_dot_)com> wrote
a message of 66 lines which said:
I notice that I'm *not* given a glue record for ns1.twisted4life.com
from the root servers.
Of course. Why should they? This domain is not a TLD.
I didn't say the root servers *should* give glue records, I pointed
out that they don't and this is consistent with the information given
by dnsreport.com.
Do note that the name servers of .COM do exactly the same (try with
"debian.com") but the broken dnsreport.com reports only for ".ORG".
Uh, I just tried dsnreport.com with debian.com and it *does* report
missing glue for both debian.com and bbc.com.
This means that my name server will have to discover the IP address
for ns1.twisted4life.com some other way.
And then have a more serious chance of getting proper data. This is
called the "out of bailiwick" problem. Name servers should not send
info they are not authoritative for, except when the glue is
absolutely necessary.
Yes, I understand that. This doesn't change the fact that without the
glue records, name servers will either have to do extra lookups, your
you will have to depend on few name servers for the initial lookups.
You may want to add an SPF record before October 1, 2004, the target
date for domains to have SPF records in place.
Bullshit.
?
Does this word need an explanation? Who decided that 2004-10-01 was
the flag day?
I'm not sure who decided, maybe George Webb or Meng or someone.
However, it has been widely reported that MS will start checking for
SPF records on Oct 1. See, for example, this article:
http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=26100570
-wayne