[34280] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [NANOG] Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eric A. Hall)
Thu Feb 1 23:52:58 2001
Message-ID: <3A7A3C72.749EBF31@ehsco.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 20:49:54 -0800
From: "Eric A. Hall" <ehall@ehsco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> > > (1) 8.2.3 Doesn't accept the "(" in the SOA string to be on the
> > > next line after the IN SOA. Our script-generated zonefiles, about
> > > 45000 of them, all had this.
> >
> > Neither do the relevant RFC's, or any other DNS implementation.
> > Pre-8.2.3 was simply _wrong_ to accept that syntax.
>
> Is there any particular harm from accepting this syntax.
No and Yes. No in that an argument could be made that the old parsing
routine fell under the "be liberal in what you accept" rules. Yes in that
the Master File Format is intended to provide an interchangable database
table, so while BIND may have been liberal it was doing so at the expense
of some interoperability measures.
The real culprit in this story is the script-generator. It should have
been cranking out standard-compliant zone files from day one.
--
Eric A. Hall http://www.ehsco.com/
Internet Core Protocols http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/
