Date: 1 Jan 2006 09:03:07 -0000 From: "PRAMENDRA SINGH" <parma_it@rediffmail.com> Subject: [dnstest:00045] test case 33 & 32 To: dnstest@tahi.org Message-Id: <20060101090307.29180.qmail@webmail7.rediffmail.com> X-Mail-Count: 00045Hi In test case 33(CL_RFC1034_5_3_3_cache_delegation - Analyze =the response(caching delegation)), the TN sends a delegation in the 2nd =step, where in the authority section we get the referal of NS2.example.co=m. & in the additional section we get the IP address for this NS2.example.=com. But in realty in the additional section it comes as NS2.NS2.examp=le.com. the NAME contents, I checked it like, not providing the client ca=ching functionality.. I mean I dint run the caching server locally...just= like normal test cases where we donot need the caching functionality... = executed the query like this dig A.example.com. (no caching) then =I got answer section empty, authority section (NSDNAME) contains NS2.exampl=e.com but the additional section (NAME) contains NS2.NS2.example.com =As per my knowledge is concerned I know it should always be the same, I mea=n the NSDNAME (authority section) & NAME (additional section) contents...al=so in RFC 1034 there are lots of examples in the section 6.2 & onwards...=.where no where I found the dissimilarity... the same happens in test =case 32 also... please let me know whether my analysis is right or wro=ng... expecting your comments.... thanks & regrads Prem45_2.html (attatchment)(tag is disabled)