Subject: wildcard as empty non terminal

From: Miek Gieben <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 14:25:18 +0200

Hello,

while reading the wildcard clarification draft and trying to implement it in
NSD, we had the following discussion.

The draft states:

2. Defining the Wild Card Domain Name

   A wild card domain name is defined by having the initial label be:

        0000 0001 0010 1010 (binary) = 0x01 0x2a (hexadecimal)

   This defines domain names that may play a role in being a wild card,
   that is, being a source for synthesized answers.  Domain names
   conforming to this definition that appear in queries and RDATA
   sections do not have any special role.  These cases will be described
   in more detail in following sections.

That is clear. In (to pick one) *.com, the '*' is a wildcard, in 
a.*.com the '*' is not a wildcard.

Next consider this:
we have a zone file with this:
	
	a.*.b		rdata

	(this implicitely defines *.b as an empty non terminal)

Next we get a query for x.y.b. Ok, we process the query, find the closest
encloser, which is .b. Then we look for *.b, now it does start with a '*' so it
has to be considered a wildcard.  So x.y.b will match on *.b?

Is this correct reasening? If not, where do we go wrong?

    grtz  Miek

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 22:59:55 +1000

> has to be considered a wildcard.  So x.y.b will match on *.b?

	Yes.
 
--
Mark Andrews, Internet Software Consortium
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: [email-masked]

---

From: Miek Gieben <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 15:35:42 +0200

[On 16 Oct, @14:59, Mark.Andre wrote in "Re: wildcard as empty non term ..."]
> > has to be considered a wildcard.  So x.y.b will match on *.b?

ok, so a "lonely" '*' in a zonefile is always to be considered a wildcard,
only stuff like aba*.com does not qualify?

grtz Miek

---

From: masataka ohta <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 22:41:08 +0900

Mark;

>>has to be considered a wildcard.  So x.y.b will match on *.b?

I think it is a reasonable clarification following 4.3.2, even though
4.3.3 states:

: In the previous algorithm, special treatment was given to RRs with owner
: names starting with the label "*".  Such RRs are called wildcards.

4.3.3 should, instead, have stated

: In the previous algorithm, special treatment was given to owner names
: starting with the label "*".  Such owner names are called wildcards.

							Masataka Ohta

---

From: Olafur Gudmundsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 09:06:04 -0400 (EDT)

> Is this correct reasening? If not, where do we go wrong?

</chair>
IMHO, wildcard algorigthm is only applicalble to terminal nodes in
the tree. your system should see that when it reaches node *.b that there
is a child node,or at least flag that this name has a child.

Thus the wildcard algorithm should be disabled for that *.b.

	Olafur

---

From: Paul Vixie <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 18:03:56 +0000

> ... your system should see that when it reaches node *.b that there

i agree.