Rick van Rein rick at openfortress.nl
Mon May 30 07:43:59 UTC 2016

Hi Wouter,

Thanks for the additional info.

>> Resultant state     | Secure | Bogus | Nxdomain
>> --------------------+--------+-------+-----------
>> happy               |    0   |   1   |    0
>> extatic             |    1   |   0   |    0
> Adding nxdomain to the list is weird.  Also the table misses the
> secure=0, bogus=0 entry.  You are happy with dnssec failure (bogus?),
> i.e. dnssec is deployed but fails?  I think the name is wrong.

Oh, it's an example of the format of a table that would be of use.  The
names happy / extactic are just meant as meaningless dribble.  I hadn't
assumed you would take me seriously ;-)

What I was trying to say is that a table of this kind is both easier to
keep complete in the documentation, and it gives developers a better
overview of how flags relate.  I imagine this to lead to confusion and
misinterpretations due to the wordy form and the (sometimes confusing)
relations between the flags.

>> This could help us determine in what order to probe flags, and whether
>> there may be flavours of Nxdomain, for instance.
> I would recommend first looking at the bogus and secure flags.
> Then see if there is data, nxdomain, havedata.
> Then look at the data.

>> I hope I didn't miss any of the documentation!
> The comments in the unbound.h header file?  The libunbound man page?

I didn't see the header file yet,


More information about the Unbound-users mailing list