Re: BIND question
From: Chris Ventura (chris@cv-source.com)Date: 01/14/02
- Next message: Edward Lee: "Re: hacking my linux box"
- Previous message: Sebastian Jaenicke: "Re: gateway-virus-scanner"
- In reply to: those who know me have no need of my name: "Re: BIND question"
- Next in thread: those who know me have no need of my name: "Re: BIND question"
- Reply: those who know me have no need of my name: "Re: BIND question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: "Chris Ventura" <chris@cv-source.com> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 21:08:24 GMT
> no resolver receiving
> an authoritative nxdomain response should ever attempt further
> resolution.
While I won't disagree, I can offer proof of concept, and functionality,
that
some clients DO in fact ask the secondary and terciery NS's.
>
> note: blackhole-ing domains requires that all independant resolvers
> forward queries to the blackhole server.
Exactly my point.
CV-64
- Next message: Edward Lee: "Re: hacking my linux box"
- Previous message: Sebastian Jaenicke: "Re: gateway-virus-scanner"
- In reply to: those who know me have no need of my name: "Re: BIND question"
- Next in thread: those who know me have no need of my name: "Re: BIND question"
- Reply: those who know me have no need of my name: "Re: BIND question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
