#domainnamesystem — Public Fediverse posts

@Habbie

Because I'm a DNS implementor too.

The main people to have adopted that are the people who were already doing things its way.

Microsoft didn't back then, & still does not now. #djbdns, likewise. MaraDNS, likewise.

Of the 3, MaraDNS is the one that specifically calls out that there is a difference in its doco, although the other 2 document the different ways that they do wildcards.

I was pointing this out when it was still a draft.

https://groups.google.com/g/comp.protocols.dns.bind/c/yfgFVyU95rA/m/Fy69mSzL1j0J

@ska
#DomainNameSystem

@Habbie

Because I'm a DNS implementor too.

The main people to have adopted that are the people who were already doing things its way.

Microsoft didn't back then, & still does not now. #djbdns, likewise. MaraDNS, likewise.

Of the 3, MaraDNS is the one that specifically calls out that there is a difference in its doco, although the other 2 document the different ways that they do wildcards.

I was pointing this out when it was still a draft.

https://groups.google.com/g/comp.protocols.dns.bind/c/yfgFVyU95rA/m/Fy69mSzL1j0J

@ska
#DomainNameSystem

@Habbie

Because I'm a DNS implementor too.

The main people to have adopted that are the people who were already doing things its way.

Microsoft didn't back then, & still does not now. #djbdns, likewise. MaraDNS, likewise.

Of the 3, MaraDNS is the one that specifically calls out that there is a difference in its doco, although the other 2 document the different ways that they do wildcards.

I was pointing this out when it was still a draft.

https://groups.google.com/g/comp.protocols.dns.bind/c/yfgFVyU95rA/m/Fy69mSzL1j0J

@ska
#DomainNameSystem

@Habbie

Because I'm a DNS implementor too.

The main people to have adopted that are the people who were already doing things its way.

Microsoft didn't back then, & still does not now. #djbdns, likewise. MaraDNS, likewise.

Of the 3, MaraDNS is the one that specifically calls out that there is a difference in its doco, although the other 2 document the different ways that they do wildcards.

I was pointing this out when it was still a draft.

https://groups.google.com/g/comp.protocols.dns.bind/c/yfgFVyU95rA/m/Fy69mSzL1j0J

@ska
#DomainNameSystem

@Habbie

Because I'm a DNS implementor too.

The main people to have adopted that are the people who were already doing things its way.

Microsoft didn't back then, & still does not now. #djbdns, likewise. MaraDNS, likewise.

Of the 3, MaraDNS is the one that specifically calls out that there is a difference in its doco, although the other 2 document the different ways that they do wildcards.

I was pointing this out when it was still a draft.

https://groups.google.com/g/comp.protocols.dns.bind/c/yfgFVyU95rA/m/Fy69mSzL1j0J

@ska
#DomainNameSystem

Press Release: ICANN86 Policy Forum Brings Global Internet Community to Seville

BRUSSELS, May 28, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) will hold its…
#Spain #ES #Europe #Europa #EU #Seville #brings #DNSSecurityExtensions #DomainNameSystem #ICANN #InternationalizedDomainNames #InternetProtocoladdresses #SpanishMinistryforDigitalTransformationandCivilService #UniversalAcceptance
https://www.europesays.com/spain/30926/

@BastilleBSD

So you're not interested in those who go the whole hog and run their own private root content DNS servers. (-:

http://jdebp.info/Softwares/djbwares/guide/dns-private-root.html

#DomainNameSystem #djbwares

@BastilleBSD

So you're not interested in those who go the whole hog and run their own private root content DNS servers. (-:

http://jdebp.info/Softwares/djbwares/guide/dns-private-root.html

#DomainNameSystem #djbwares

@BastilleBSD

So you're not interested in those who go the whole hog and run their own private root content DNS servers. (-:

http://jdebp.info/Softwares/djbwares/guide/dns-private-root.html

#DomainNameSystem #djbwares

@BastilleBSD

So you're not interested in those who go the whole hog and run their own private root content DNS servers. (-:

http://jdebp.info/Softwares/djbwares/guide/dns-private-root.html

#DomainNameSystem #djbwares

@BastilleBSD

So you're not interested in those who go the whole hog and run their own private root content DNS servers. (-:

http://jdebp.info/Softwares/djbwares/guide/dns-private-root.html

#DomainNameSystem #djbwares

@ska

Don't fall into the trap of treating RFC4592 as a spec.

It's still a proposed standard, and there's a *lot* of stuff in the DNS RFC world that seems like a spec, until one hits the real world and finds that it's a decade-or-more wild goose chase that the RFCs don't tell you has failed to take off.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44320497

The reality is that RFC4592 didn't take off, either. *No-one* has adopted it that wasn't the implementation that it sought to ossify.

#DomainNameSystem

@ska

Don't fall into the trap of treating RFC4592 as a spec.

It's still a proposed standard, and there's a *lot* of stuff in the DNS RFC world that seems like a spec, until one hits the real world and finds that it's a decade-or-more wild goose chase that the RFCs don't tell you has failed to take off.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44320497

The reality is that RFC4592 didn't take off, either. *No-one* has adopted it that wasn't the implementation that it sought to ossify.

#DomainNameSystem

@ska

Don't fall into the trap of treating RFC4592 as a spec.

It's still a proposed standard, and there's a *lot* of stuff in the DNS RFC world that seems like a spec, until one hits the real world and finds that it's a decade-or-more wild goose chase that the RFCs don't tell you has failed to take off.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44320497

The reality is that RFC4592 didn't take off, either. *No-one* has adopted it that wasn't the implementation that it sought to ossify.

#DomainNameSystem

@ska

Don't fall into the trap of treating RFC4592 as a spec.

It's still a proposed standard, and there's a *lot* of stuff in the DNS RFC world that seems like a spec, until one hits the real world and finds that it's a decade-or-more wild goose chase that the RFCs don't tell you has failed to take off.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44320497

The reality is that RFC4592 didn't take off, either. *No-one* has adopted it that wasn't the implementation that it sought to ossify.

#DomainNameSystem

@ska

Don't fall into the trap of treating RFC4592 as a spec.

It's still a proposed standard, and there's a *lot* of stuff in the DNS RFC world that seems like a spec, until one hits the real world and finds that it's a decade-or-more wild goose chase that the RFCs don't tell you has failed to take off.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44320497

The reality is that RFC4592 didn't take off, either. *No-one* has adopted it that wasn't the implementation that it sought to ossify.

#DomainNameSystem

@ska

No, I'm not mixing things. I was there. I was there when the wildcard draft was made, trying to point out various problems in it, 2 years before publication. I was also there doing the user support, and I can tell you from a lot of actual experience with end users and this stuff that you are quite wrong.

Wildcards were one of the things that users asked about, over and over. BIND wasn't intuitive. Indeed people are still saying so on StackExchage 20 years later.

#DomainNameSystem

@ska

No, I'm not mixing things. I was there. I was there when the wildcard draft was made, trying to point out various problems in it, 2 years before publication. I was also there doing the user support, and I can tell you from a lot of actual experience with end users and this stuff that you are quite wrong.

Wildcards were one of the things that users asked about, over and over. BIND wasn't intuitive. Indeed people are still saying so on StackExchage 20 years later.

#DomainNameSystem

@ska

No, I'm not mixing things. I was there. I was there when the wildcard draft was made, trying to point out various problems in it, 2 years before publication. I was also there doing the user support, and I can tell you from a lot of actual experience with end users and this stuff that you are quite wrong.

Wildcards were one of the things that users asked about, over and over. BIND wasn't intuitive. Indeed people are still saying so on StackExchage 20 years later.

#DomainNameSystem

@ska

No, I'm not mixing things. I was there. I was there when the wildcard draft was made, trying to point out various problems in it, 2 years before publication. I was also there doing the user support, and I can tell you from a lot of actual experience with end users and this stuff that you are quite wrong.

Wildcards were one of the things that users asked about, over and over. BIND wasn't intuitive. Indeed people are still saying so on StackExchage 20 years later.

#DomainNameSystem

@ska

No, I'm not mixing things. I was there. I was there when the wildcard draft was made, trying to point out various problems in it, 2 years before publication. I was also there doing the user support, and I can tell you from a lot of actual experience with end users and this stuff that you are quite wrong.

Wildcards were one of the things that users asked about, over and over. BIND wasn't intuitive. Indeed people are still saying so on StackExchage 20 years later.

#DomainNameSystem

@ska

I hope not, if working like #djbdns is the goal.

RFC4592 has a tree-structure model of domain name existence that prevents wildcards from working in some cases in a way that the djbdns table-structure model does not prevent.

Using the RFC4592 example:

When one does an MX lookup for _telnet._tcp.example. or ghost.*.example. it returns a non-empty record set because of the @ wildcard at *.example. .

In the RFC4592 model, the *.example. wildcard does not get applied.

#DomainNameSystem

@ska

I hope not, if working like #djbdns is the goal.

RFC4592 has a tree-structure model of domain name existence that prevents wildcards from working in some cases in a way that the djbdns table-structure model does not prevent.

Using the RFC4592 example:

When one does an MX lookup for _telnet._tcp.example. or ghost.*.example. it returns a non-empty record set because of the @ wildcard at *.example. .

In the RFC4592 model, the *.example. wildcard does not get applied.

#DomainNameSystem

@ska

I hope not, if working like #djbdns is the goal.

RFC4592 has a tree-structure model of domain name existence that prevents wildcards from working in some cases in a way that the djbdns table-structure model does not prevent.

Using the RFC4592 example:

When one does an MX lookup for _telnet._tcp.example. or ghost.*.example. it returns a non-empty record set because of the @ wildcard at *.example. .

In the RFC4592 model, the *.example. wildcard does not get applied.

#DomainNameSystem

@ska

I hope not, if working like #djbdns is the goal.

RFC4592 has a tree-structure model of domain name existence that prevents wildcards from working in some cases in a way that the djbdns table-structure model does not prevent.

Using the RFC4592 example:

When one does an MX lookup for _telnet._tcp.example. or ghost.*.example. it returns a non-empty record set because of the @ wildcard at *.example. .

In the RFC4592 model, the *.example. wildcard does not get applied.

#DomainNameSystem

@ska

I hope not, if working like #djbdns is the goal.

RFC4592 has a tree-structure model of domain name existence that prevents wildcards from working in some cases in a way that the djbdns table-structure model does not prevent.

Using the RFC4592 example:

When one does an MX lookup for _telnet._tcp.example. or ghost.*.example. it returns a non-empty record set because of the @ wildcard at *.example. .

In the RFC4592 model, the *.example. wildcard does not get applied.

#DomainNameSystem

#DNS-Probleme: .de-Domains nicht erreichbar | heise online https://www.heise.de/news/DNS-Probleme-de-Domains-nicht-erreichbar-11283192.html #denic #DomainNameSystem

#DNS-Probleme: .de-Domains nicht erreichbar | heise online https://www.heise.de/news/DNS-Probleme-de-Domains-nicht-erreichbar-11283192.html #denic #DomainNameSystem

#DNS-Probleme: .de-Domains nicht erreichbar | heise online https://www.heise.de/news/DNS-Probleme-de-Domains-nicht-erreichbar-11283192.html #denic #DomainNameSystem

#DNS-Probleme: .de-Domains nicht erreichbar | heise online https://www.heise.de/news/DNS-Probleme-de-Domains-nicht-erreichbar-11283192.html #denic #DomainNameSystem

@cks @lanodan

Missing from @drscriptt 's list are AAAA, HTTPS, and SVCB records.

AAAA has plenty of obvious choices.

You'll know the . convention for SRV, SVCB, and MX resource record sets, of course.

I shall just drop in my personal experience from earlier this year that an accidentally supplied HTTPS resource record can *definitely* break WWW traffic; because browsers in practice do not obey RFC9460 §2.4.2.

#djbdns
#DomainNameSystem
#SplitHorizon
#ReservedSuperDomains #DNS #HTTPS #SVCB

@cks @lanodan

Missing from @drscriptt 's list are AAAA, HTTPS, and SVCB records.

AAAA has plenty of obvious choices.

You'll know the . convention for SRV, SVCB, and MX resource record sets, of course.

I shall just drop in my personal experience from earlier this year that an accidentally supplied HTTPS resource record can *definitely* break WWW traffic; because browsers in practice do not obey RFC9460 §2.4.2.

#djbdns
#DomainNameSystem
#SplitHorizon
#ReservedSuperDomains #DNS #HTTPS #SVCB

@cks @lanodan

Missing from @drscriptt 's list are AAAA, HTTPS, and SVCB records.

AAAA has plenty of obvious choices.

You'll know the . convention for SRV, SVCB, and MX resource record sets, of course.

I shall just drop in my personal experience from earlier this year that an accidentally supplied HTTPS resource record can *definitely* break WWW traffic; because browsers in practice do not obey RFC9460 §2.4.2.

#djbdns
#DomainNameSystem
#SplitHorizon
#ReservedSuperDomains #DNS #HTTPS #SVCB

@cks @lanodan

Missing from @drscriptt 's list are AAAA, HTTPS, and SVCB records.

AAAA has plenty of obvious choices.

You'll know the . convention for SRV, SVCB, and MX resource record sets, of course.

I shall just drop in my personal experience from earlier this year that an accidentally supplied HTTPS resource record can *definitely* break WWW traffic; because browsers in practice do not obey RFC9460 §2.4.2.

#djbdns
#DomainNameSystem
#SplitHorizon
#ReservedSuperDomains #DNS #HTTPS #SVCB

@cks @lanodan @drscriptt

There are actually quite a few, nowadays. See RFCs 6762, 7686, and 8375.

example. is not the worst choice, although you could have gone with test. or internal. or intranet. .

Given your objective, any of the further ones that imply a residence or a corporation seem less well suited.

Although home.arpa.'s public delegation to the blackhole-{1,2}.iana.org. names is re-used.

https://github.com/jdebp/nosh/blob/trunk/source/examples/tinydns/split-horizon#L96

#djbdns #DomainNameSystem #SplitHorizon #ReservedSuperDomains #DNS

@cks @lanodan @drscriptt

There are actually quite a few, nowadays. See RFCs 6762, 7686, and 8375.

example. is not the worst choice, although you could have gone with test. or internal. or intranet. .

Given your objective, any of the further ones that imply a residence or a corporation seem less well suited.

Although home.arpa.'s public delegation to the blackhole-{1,2}.iana.org. names is re-used.

https://github.com/jdebp/nosh/blob/trunk/source/examples/tinydns/split-horizon#L96

#djbdns #DomainNameSystem #SplitHorizon #ReservedSuperDomains #DNS

@cks @lanodan @drscriptt

There are actually quite a few, nowadays. See RFCs 6762, 7686, and 8375.

example. is not the worst choice, although you could have gone with test. or internal. or intranet. .

Given your objective, any of the further ones that imply a residence or a corporation seem less well suited.

Although home.arpa.'s public delegation to the blackhole-{1,2}.iana.org. names is re-used.

https://github.com/jdebp/nosh/blob/trunk/source/examples/tinydns/split-horizon#L96

#djbdns #DomainNameSystem #SplitHorizon #ReservedSuperDomains #DNS

@cks @lanodan @drscriptt

There are actually quite a few, nowadays. See RFCs 6762, 7686, and 8375.

example. is not the worst choice, although you could have gone with test. or internal. or intranet. .

Given your objective, any of the further ones that imply a residence or a corporation seem less well suited.

Although home.arpa.'s public delegation to the blackhole-{1,2}.iana.org. names is re-used.

https://github.com/jdebp/nosh/blob/trunk/source/examples/tinydns/split-horizon#L96

#djbdns #DomainNameSystem #SplitHorizon #ReservedSuperDomains #DNS

@cks @lanodan @drscriptt

There are actually quite a few, nowadays. See RFCs 6762, 7686, and 8375.

example. is not the worst choice, although you could have gone with test. or internal. or intranet. .

Given your objective, any of the further ones that imply a residence or a corporation seem less well suited.

Although home.arpa.'s public delegation to the blackhole-{1,2}.iana.org. names is re-used.

https://github.com/jdebp/nosh/blob/trunk/source/examples/tinydns/split-horizon#L96

#djbdns #DomainNameSystem #SplitHorizon #ReservedSuperDomains #DNS

Kommentar zum #AWS-Fail: Hinter dem Sündenbock #DNS steht Hyperscaler-Inkompetenz | iX Magazin https://www.heise.de/meinung/Kommentar-zum-AWS-Ausfall-It-s-always-DNS-unless-it-isn-t-11077553.html #DomainNameSystem #Amazon #AmazonWebServices

Kommentar zum #AWS-Fail: Hinter dem Sündenbock #DNS steht Hyperscaler-Inkompetenz | iX Magazin https://www.heise.de/meinung/Kommentar-zum-AWS-Ausfall-It-s-always-DNS-unless-it-isn-t-11077553.html #DomainNameSystem #Amazon #AmazonWebServices

Kommentar zum #AWS-Fail: Hinter dem Sündenbock #DNS steht Hyperscaler-Inkompetenz | iX Magazin https://www.heise.de/meinung/Kommentar-zum-AWS-Ausfall-It-s-always-DNS-unless-it-isn-t-11077553.html #DomainNameSystem #Amazon #AmazonWebServices

Kommentar zum #AWS-Fail: Hinter dem Sündenbock #DNS steht Hyperscaler-Inkompetenz | iX Magazin https://www.heise.de/meinung/Kommentar-zum-AWS-Ausfall-It-s-always-DNS-unless-it-isn-t-11077553.html #DomainNameSystem #Amazon #AmazonWebServices

Signal down: Messenger-App weltweit ausgefallen | heise online https://www.heise.de/news/Messenger-App-Signal-offenbar-weltweit-mit-Stoerungen-10778899.html #AWS #Amazon #AmazonWebServices #DNS #DomainNameSystem

Signal down: Messenger-App weltweit ausgefallen | heise online https://www.heise.de/news/Messenger-App-Signal-offenbar-weltweit-mit-Stoerungen-10778899.html #AWS #Amazon #AmazonWebServices #DNS #DomainNameSystem

Signal down: Messenger-App weltweit ausgefallen | heise online https://www.heise.de/news/Messenger-App-Signal-offenbar-weltweit-mit-Stoerungen-10778899.html #AWS #Amazon #AmazonWebServices #DNS #DomainNameSystem

Signal down: Messenger-App weltweit ausgefallen | heise online https://www.heise.de/news/Messenger-App-Signal-offenbar-weltweit-mit-Stoerungen-10778899.html #AWS #Amazon #AmazonWebServices #DNS #DomainNameSystem

Signal down: Messenger-App weltweit ausgefallen | heise online https://www.heise.de/news/Messenger-App-Signal-offenbar-weltweit-mit-Stoerungen-10778899.html #AWS #Amazon #AmazonWebServices #DNS #DomainNameSystem

Hier sieht man, wie viele Dienste #AWS nutzen ...

#AmazonWebServices: Globale Störung am Montagmorgen | heise online https://www.heise.de/news/Amazon-Web-Services-Globale-Stoerung-10778963.html #DNS #DomainNameSystem #Amazon

Hier sieht man, wie viele Dienste #AWS nutzen ...

#AmazonWebServices: Globale Störung am Montagmorgen | heise online https://www.heise.de/news/Amazon-Web-Services-Globale-Stoerung-10778963.html #DNS #DomainNameSystem #Amazon