[Yeti DNS Discuss] 答复: Fwd: [dns-operations] Limit on Name Servers & their IPs for a sub-domain

Davey Song(宋林健) ljsong at biigroup.cn
Thu Jan 18 02:45:49 UTC 2018

I put a post in Yeti blog as a response. 


In conclusion the size limit of 13 is not technical applied. But people
still has a inertia that 13 is the fix number of NS records. Now IPv6
fragmentation issue introduces new size limit that exert constraint on the
size of response (1500 octets). Now the practical and safe choice is to keep
the limit 19 for dualstack, 26 for IPv6-only taking 1500 octets as a packets
limit.All glue records can be contained. If you want to add more NS records,
you will lose some glue records.

Yeti is taken as an case study in this context. Yeti testbed now has 25 root
name servers which already surpassed the limit. The response behaviors of
different root servers vary. It is observed some servers in Yeti response no
glue in priming response which is put in question. Although the consistency
of DNS response is lost, it is good to have diversity for testbed purpose.


> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: discuss [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.yeti-dns.org] 代表 Paul
> 发送时间: 2018年1月12日 3:17
> 收件人: discuss at lists.yeti-dns.org
> 主题: [Yeti DNS Discuss] Fwd: [dns-operations] Limit on Name Servers &
> IPs for a sub-domain
> somebody should answer this with actual experimental results.

More information about the discuss mailing list