[ratelimits] Upwards referrals Re: error in amplification attack

[Edward Lewis]

At 11:22 +0000 11/14/12, Tony Finch wrote:
>P Vixie <paul at redbarn.org> wrote:
>
>>  An upward delegation is actually a protocol error
>
>Gosh, really? It seems to be required by the name server algorithm in RFC
>1034 section 4.3.2 (except if the server is authoritative-only).

Not a protocol-error but an error-in-the-protocol.  (Referring, no 
pun intended, to the root-referral message used to indicate a server 
is lame.)
-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis
NeuStar                    You can leave a voice message at +1-571-434-5468

2012...time to reuse those 1984 calendars!