this is unfortunately not how rrsets work.
-
-
Yes it is, on every single non-Google DNS intended for use by stub resolvers.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
I'm really not aware of any auth or recursor doing that and rrsets are indivisible for various reasons.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vavrusam @RichFelker and
I don't really know you, if you're on "I'm right" crusade without any support in protocol spec, enjoy.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
It's clear from text of RFC1123 that truncated answers are meant to be usable except some special cases.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RichFelker @vavrusam and
MX is cited there as a special case where you can't use a truncated result.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RichFelker @vavrusam and
And the "SHOULD try...TCP" is conditional on "if the requester supports TCP".
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
come on, 1123 is RFC from 1989 that's been amended several times, most notably 2181.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I'm not going by spec but by what behavior is fundamentally necessary for decent UX.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RichFelker @vavrusam and
Multiple round trips to get 100 extra A's you don't want or need is not decent UX.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
The correct behavior, partial truncation, gives client a choice (TC bit) whether to ask for full rrset...
-
-
Replying to @RichFelker @vavrusam and
...or whether to use one of the first 100 A's it already got.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.