separation of authoritative and recursive functions on internal networks
gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net
Mon Feb 8 00:35:20 UTC 2016
On 02/07/2016 04:55 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>>> This proves robustness in the presence of link failures.
>>> Faster than ttl expiry of local zone changes (provided that notify
>>> messages are sent).
>> I presume you are referring to the slave zone expiration timer, not
>> normal record TTLs.
> No, I mean normal TTL.
Now I'm confused. Will you please elaborate on what you meant then?
I interpret "normal TTL" to be the TTL for a given record. Is that also
what you mean?
Are you referring to the fact that a caching recursive server will
expire the TTL before refreshing to see the new / updated zone contents?
Compared to the slave server (presumably with properly functional
notifications) seeing the same new / updated zone contents?
> If you are a slave and are getting notify
> messages updates happen in seconds, not minutes or hours which are
> the usual range for TTL values.
I mis-took your statement about link failures to mean the ability to
continue serving the zone while the link was down until the zone expired.
> .local doesn't have servers.
Please forgive me while I look at many Small Business Server / poorly
That being said, I'll give you that it's not an official TLD. (Last I
> Home zones generally aren't delegated to so there isn't a need for
> seperation of rolls. Even if they are delegated to the home server
> is more likely to be a stealth master so it won't be in the NS
> RRset. And as with almost all rules there are exceptions.
Hence my question about how / where SOHO recursive / authoritative
servers fall into the rule ~> exception.
Grant. . . .
unix || die
More information about the bind-users