[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
inconsistency between rfc 2136 and rfc 2845
During a Secure Dynamic Update tutorial at RIPE 43 a situation arose
that seems to indicate a conflict between RFC 2136 (Dynamic Update)
and RFC 2854 (Secret Key Authentication for DNS). The problem isn't
major - the labeling of an error condition is the problem.
In 2136, we have this:
2.2 - Message Header
...
RCODE Response code - this four bit field is undefined in requests
and set in responses. The values and meanings of this field
within responses are as follows:
Mneumonic Value Description
------------------------------------------------------------
...
NOTAUTH 9 The server is not authoritative for
the zone named in the Zone Section.
(Mnemonic is misspelled in the RFC text.)
In RFC 2854, we have this text:
3 - Protocol Operation
...
3.2. TSIG processing on incoming messages
...
If an incoming message contains a TSIG record, it MUST be the last
...
........................................................... If the
algorithm name or key name is unknown to the recipient, or if the
message digests do not match, the whole DNS message MUST be
discarded. If the message is a query, a response with RCODE 9
(NOTAUTH) MUST be sent back to the originator with TSIG ERROR 17
(BADKEY) or TSIG ERROR 16 (BADSIG). ....
The issue is that in 2136 "NOTAUTH" seems to mean not authoritative
and in 2854 "NOTAUTH" seems to mean not authenticated.
The reason this was noticed was in the reply to an update where the
key was undefined to the server but the update was to a name & type
in the zone. Rightly so, the software determined that the request
was not properly authenticated and followed 2854's words. But when I
was trying to explain this in the tutorial, I found the 2136
definition to seem to indicate a different error.
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis +1-703-227-9854
ARIN Research Engineer
--
to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>