Requery on RR expiration automatically

Kevin Darcy kcd at
Fri Jun 14 21:52:39 UTC 2002

John Morrison wrote:

> > Sounds like it would be simpler to just fix the stub resolver instead.
> > After all, I might remember things wrong but I was under the
> > impression that stub resolvers don't do any caching, but rather just
> > ask another name server which does the work?
> Unfortunately the software is part of an "Off the shelf" mail package =
> that cannot be fixed. The reason i call it a stub is because less the =
> caching thats how its resolution process acts.
> > Maybe you can arrange to slave the zones in question, if they aren't
> > too many? But that still doesn't solve the underlying issue.
> This would be up to a few hundred thousand.

And you think it would be *better* to continually re-query at least one
name in every one of those zones?!?!?

A properly set up IXFR configuration, with reasonable REFRESH settings,
should be at least as efficient as your "automatic re-query" mechanism, and
wouldn't require any code hacking.

I sure hope you're talking about 100's of thousands of *internal* zones,
otherwise surely you must realize how anti-social it would be to spam 100's
of thousands of other people's nameservers with unnecessary queries, just
to humor a vendor's broken implementation of a caching stub resolver.
There's no way I could condone anything like that.

- Kevin

More information about the bind-users mailing list