Problems with bind9 caching too long

Brad Knowles brad at
Tue Mar 15 02:57:20 UTC 2005

At 6:23 PM -0800 2005-03-14, Phil Dibowitz wrote:

>  Or - lets say we'd done this with a newer company, or ultradns when they were
>  new... but then they started doing questionable things... so we pull their
>  delegation. Except that despite _owning_, I can't exert any control
>  over once I've delegated it - even to revoke that 
>delegation. This
>  doesn't follow, at least in my mind.

	If you own the parent zone, then you can yank the delegation for 
the child zone.  Wherever you point that new delegation, they are 
authoritative for that information.  Whatever information you may 
have about that zone (beyond the NS records) is just glue and is not 

	Now, if you delegate that zone to yourself, you can be 
authoritative for both the parent and the child.

	Either way, once the delegation is pointed somewhere else, it 
shouldn't matter what the old server operators do.

	The only time you run into problems here is when the old server 
operators for the child zone are also responsible for running the 
parent zone, and then you get into nasty problems, as the information 
for the old child zone effectively "poisons" the information that 
they store in the parent zone.

	The way to solve this problem is to run software that keeps 
"chinese walls" between all parent zone and child zone information, 
which I think is the problem that Mark alluded to.

Brad Knowles, <brad at>

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

     -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
     Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755

   SAGE member since 1995.  See <> for more info.

More information about the bind-users mailing list