Number of additional records in queries

[Brown, Chris]

If this is indeed the rationale then it would suggest the additional record check should be locked down further to pass only the OPT record, and not all record types, as the sole record allowed in the additional section of a query.  And FORMERR everything else.

Thanks again to everyone for their replies.  I am not sure what we are going to do yet but I am sure it will be interesting.


> I would say yes, it is very much desired.
>
> Rationale:
> If any future protocol extension makes use of new RR type in additional section and these are silently ignored then we have no way of detecting if the new extension is > supported or not.
>
> In other words FORMERR is the only future-proof thing to do.
>
> Petr ?pa?ek  @  CZ.NIC