RE: [sitefinder-tech-discuss] Technical issues encountered by a k 12 site

["Hamilton, Kent" <KHamilton@Hunter.COM>]

<RANT>
The fact that this question even got asked ticks me off. 

My question to you becomes, why in gods name would your company be so
arrogant as to believe that their business interests are so much more
important than mine that you can force me to change code at your whim when
that code has in fact worked for years. 
</RANT>

As for the code in question in my instance we had the usual sendmail no
longer rejects spam issue the entire world did, and the in-house app.  The
in-house one I would guess was due to libraries but since my group was not
responsible for the code development I can't and won't bother to verify
that. I also had a case of the already mentioned Windows resolve going files
-> DNS -> NetBIOS and never getting to NetBIOS because you screwed us always
having our machines try to connect to you rather than the server they were
supposed to find in NetBIOS/WINS.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hollenbeck, Scott [mailto:shollenbeck@verisign.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 12:14 PM
> To: 'Hamilton, Kent'
> Cc: 'sitefinder-tech-discuss@lists.elistx.com'
> Subject: RE: [sitefinder-tech-discuss] Technical issues 
> encountered by a k 12 site
> 
> 
> > For a change of the scope you made with zero notice?  At 
> > LEAST 3 months.
> > I'll have to have my test group look at code changes, make 
> > the changes, fix
> > the ones that break. We have in-house code that you broke for 
> > us thank you.
> 
> The above touches on a question that I've wanted to ask other 
> application
> developers.
> 
> Wildcards have been a part of the DNS specification since 
> standard 13 (RFCs
> 1034 and 1035) was published in 1987.  I started my 
> professional life as an
> applications programmer; reading protocol specifications and 
> writing code to
> implement those specs was part of what I did.  If I was 
> writing code to use
> the DNS, I'd consider the possibility of receiving a 
> synthesized response
> because the possibility is clearly outlined in the resolution 
> algorithm
> described in RFC 1034.
> 
> So -- with wildcards and synthesized responses being a part 
> of the DNS specs
> for the last 16 years, why didn't your in-house code account for the
> possibility of receiving a synthesized response from the DNS if a
> synthesized response can be a problem for you?    I'm trying 
> to understand
> how others have interpreted the specifications when writing 
> code and why
> they made the decisions they did.  If it's just a matter of 
> "hey, we used
> existing libraries and we trust how they work", that's cool.
> 
> I'm also asking because something that came up during yesterday's open
> meeting with ICANN's Security and Stability Committee was a 
> question about
> whether or not the DNS protocol should be updated to provide a way for
> clients to know when a response has been synthesized.  Would that be
> something that's valuable to application developers?
> 
> -Scott-
>