Skip to content

[dns-server] Answers for the rack's zones should be authoritative#8120

Merged
iximeow merged 3 commits intomainfrom
ixi/dns-authoritative-answers
Jun 3, 2025
Merged

[dns-server] Answers for the rack's zones should be authoritative#8120
iximeow merged 3 commits intomainfrom
ixi/dns-authoritative-answers

Conversation

@iximeow
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@iximeow iximeow commented May 8, 2025

This makes most answers authoritative and changes tests to match. This won't change rack-internal DNS behavior; we don't rely on aa in answers for anything internal. External DNS servers will also now set the aa bit for queries for silo domains, though, so our DNS answers will look a bit more normal.

We're authoritative for NXDomain answers to names under the zones a server is authoritative for that are not present, though we're not (yet) sending an SOA record to indicate how long a client can cache the negative reuslt.

We are not authoritative for ServFail answers even if they are for names we're authoritative for. The aa bit here has no RFC-defined meaning, and this is more straightforward than trying to partition ServFail into "our names" and "not our names" kinds.

This makes most answers authoritative and changes tests to match. This
won't change rack-internal DNS behavior; we don't rely on `aa` in
answers for anything internal. External DNS servers will also now set
the `aa` bit for queries for silo domains, though, so our DNS answers
will look a bit more normal.

We're authoritative for `NXDomain` answers to names under the zones a
server is authoritative for that are not present, though we're not (yet)
sending an SOA record to indicate how long a client can cache the
negative reuslt.

We are *not* authoritative for `ServFail` answers even if they are for
names we're authoritative for. The `aa` bit here has no RFC-defined
meaning.
@iximeow iximeow merged commit 186302d into main Jun 3, 2025
16 checks passed
@iximeow iximeow deleted the ixi/dns-authoritative-answers branch June 3, 2025 01:58
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants