TTL for name servers

[Peter Andreev]

2012/6/6 Mark Andrews <marka at isc.org>

>
> In message <CABUciRkVT6mBS0ZS3WL4tS7uTPgYNVBkOr890fsB9OoqP=
> CeOQ at mail.gmail.com>
> , Alexander Gurvitz writes:
> > Hi.
> >
> > TTL returned by YOUR zone authoritative server will (at least should) be
> > preferred by caches.
> >
> > Matt Larson from verisign explained on these:
> >
> > http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/2004-07/msg00255.html
> >
> > Regards,
> > Alexander Gurvitz,
> > net-me.net
>
> TTL of NS records are complicated as the existance of the delegation
> is covered by the parents NS records but the contents of the NS
> records comes from the child zone.  Named looks at both TTLs to
> determine when to remove the NS RRset.
>

Mark, could you please describe the algorithm being used by BIND? Does it
choose NS rrset with lowest TTL or something else?


> https://deepthought.isc.org/article/AA-00691/
>
> If you are wanting to workout when to decommission a nameserver take the
> maximum of the two NS rrset after they have both been updated as when it
> is safe to decommission.
>
> Mark
>
> --
> Mark Andrews, ISC
> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka at isc.org
> _______________________________________________
> Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to
> unsubscribe from this list
>
> bind-users mailing list
> bind-users at lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
>



-- 
AP
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/attachments/20120606/f5f99bd7/attachment.html>