Can someone from Amazon please answer.

Tue Aug 23 23:37:10 UTC 2016

I'm curious.  What are you trying to achieve by blocking EDNS version
negotiation?  Is it really too hard to return BADVERS to a EDNS
query with version != 0 along with the version of EDNS you support
in the version field?  Are you deliberately trying to prevent the
IETF from deciding to bump the EDNS version in the future?  Do you
have firewalls that have this behaviour hard coded?  Do you even
test for RFC compliance?

Mark

lostoncampus.com.au. @205.251.195.156 (ns-924.awsdns-51.net.): dns=ok edns=ok edns1=timeout edns at 512=ok ednsopt=ok edns1opt=timeout do=ok ednsflags=ok optlist=ok,nsid,subnet signed=ok ednstcp=ok
lostoncampus.com.au. @205.251.192.78 (ns-78.awsdns-09.com.): dns=ok edns=ok edns1=timeout edns at 512=ok ednsopt=ok edns1opt=timeout do=ok ednsflags=ok optlist=ok,nsid,subnet signed=ok ednstcp=ok
lostoncampus.com.au. @205.251.196.198 (ns-1222.awsdns-24.org.): dns=ok edns=ok edns1=timeout edns at 512=ok ednsopt=ok edns1opt=timeout do=ok ednsflags=ok optlist=ok,nsid,subnet signed=ok ednstcp=ok
lostoncampus.com.au. @205.251.199.20 (ns-1812.awsdns-34.co.uk.): dns=ok edns=ok edns1=timeout edns at 512=ok ednsopt=ok edns1opt=timeout do=ok ednsflags=ok optlist=ok,nsid,subnet signed=ok ednstcp=ok

-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE:	+61 2 9871 4742		         INTERNET: marka at isc.org