You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Latest guidance[1] suggests using buffer sizes of 1232 bytes, which is optimized to reduce IP fragmentation as well as the need to switch to TCP. The default udpPayloadSize in minidns is 1024 bytes.
For example, a DNSSEC-validated DNSKEY record for <Root> will return UDP truncation with a buffer size of 1024 bytes. At present, the DNS payload is 1139 bytes.
dig +dnssec +bufsize=1024 DNSKEY .
Is there any opposition to increasing minidns' default size from 1024 to 1232?
It is important for DNS software vendors to comply with DNS standards, and to use a default EDNS buffer size (1232 bytes) that will not cause fragmentation on typical network links. Relevant standards include RFC 7766, RFC 6891 section 6.2.3. and RFC 6891 section 6.2.4.. The motivation for this effort is described in IETF draft intarea-frag-fragile section 6.1 and IETF draft iab-protocol-maintenance.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Latest guidance[1] suggests using buffer sizes of 1232 bytes, which is optimized to reduce IP fragmentation as well as the need to switch to TCP. The default udpPayloadSize in minidns is 1024 bytes.
For example, a DNSSEC-validated DNSKEY record for <Root> will return UDP truncation with a buffer size of 1024 bytes. At present, the DNS payload is 1139 bytes.
dig +dnssec +bufsize=1024 DNSKEY .
Is there any opposition to increasing minidns' default size from 1024 to 1232?
[1]: https://www.dnsflagday.net/2020/#action-dns-software-vendors reads:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: