--============_-1011073144==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"

At 16:04 -0800 1/22/08, David Conrad wrote:
>Waking up from my nap...
>
>On 1/22/08 3:10 PM, "Edward Lewis" wrote:
>> The issue about whether it MUST be 0 or is something else is
>> comlicated by the fact that it has changed in the registry ([IANA])
>> and we don't know why.

>
>Eh? What registry?


Referring to "bit 9" http://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-header-flags,

#DNS Header Flags per [RFC1035]
#------------------------------
#In DNS query header there is a flag field in the
#second 16 bit word in query from bit 5 through
#bit 11 (RFC1035 section 4.1.1)
#
#
#bit 5 AA Authorative Answer [RFC1035]
#bit 6 TC Truncated Response [RFC1035]
#bit 7 RD Recursion Desired [RFC1035]
#bit 8 RA Recursion Allowed [RFC1035]
#bit 9 Reserved
#bit 10 AD Authentic Data [RFC4035]
#bit 11 CD Checking Disabled [RFC4035]

I admit that it doesn't say [IANA] there, but I can say this is where
the false memory got in my head:

From: http://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-parameters

#Domain System Operation Code:
#
#OpCode Name References
#------ ---- ----------
# 0 Query [RFC1035]
# 1 OpCode Retired (previously IQUERY - No further [RFC3425]
# assignment of this code available)
# 2 Status [RFC1035]
# 3 reserved [IANA]
....

With a reread, maybe the only "mistake" in the IANA registry is that
the "bit 9" should still read:

bit 9 Z Reserved [RFC1035]


And I need to reword out the "Z bit" because Z referred to 3 bits
"reserved for future use" in RFC 1035.

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

Think glocally. Act confused.
--============_-1011073144==_ma============
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"


Re: Note 2.1.1.b was Re: I-D<br /> ACTION:draft-ietf-dnsext-axf
At 16:04 -0800 1/22/08, David Conrad wrote:

>Waking up from my nap...

>

>On 1/22/08 3:10 PM, "Edward Lewis"
<Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz> wrote:

>> The issue about whether it MUST be 0 or is something else
is

>> comlicated by the fact that it has changed in the registry
([IANA])

>> and we don't know why.

>

>Eh?  What registry?



Referring to "bit 9"
http://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-header-flags,



#DNS Header Flags per [RFC1035]

#------------------------------

#In DNS query header there is a flag field in the

#second 16 bit word in query from bit 5 through

#bit 11 (RFC1035 section 4.1.1)

#

#

#bit 5     AA   Authorative
Answer      
[RFC1035]

#bit 6     TC   Truncated
Response     [RFC1035]

#bit 7     RD   Recursion
Desired      [RFC1035]

#bit 8     RA   Recursion
Allowed      
[RFC1035]

#bit 9         
Reserved

#bit 10    AD   Authentic
Data         
[RFC4035]

#bit 11    CD   Checking
Disabled      [RFC4035]



I admit that it doesn't say [IANA] there, but I can say this is
where the false memory got in my head:



From: http://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-parameters



#Domain System Operation Code:

#

#OpCode  
Name          
> >            > >            >         
References

#------  
----          
>
>            > >            >         
----------

#     0  
Query          
>
>            > >            >         
[RFC1035]

#     1   OpCode Retired (previously
IQUERY - No further [RFC3425]

#         assignment of this
code available)

#     2  
Status          
>
>            > >            >        
[RFC1035]

#     3  
reserved          
> >            > >            >       [IANA]

...



With a reread, maybe the only "mistake" in the IANA
registry is that the "bit 9" should still read:



bit 9      Z   Reserved
       
       
[RFC1035]





And I need to reword out the "Z bit" because Z referred
to 3 bits "reserved for future use" in RFC 1035.



--


>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >-=-=-=-

Edward
Lewis          
>
>            > >            > >            >     +1-571-434-5468

NeuStar