Mukund Sivaraman 于2017年12月2日周六 下午10:39写道:
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 05:16:47PM +, Ólafur Guðmundsson wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 5:02 PM, Wessels, Duane
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > > On Dec 1, 2017, at 8:38 AM, Ólafur Guðmundsson <
>
The text for "in-bailwick" is too restrictive, it doesn’t just cover NS records
or
glue records.
In-bailwick refers to records that in the normal course of DNS resolution
would have been requested of by the server the current response is from.
e.g. if you are querying a .com server then all
At Sat, 2 Dec 2017 20:09:25 +0530,
Mukund Sivaraman wrote:
> > Strictly speaking yes, it is the same as when a Secondary does not update
> > the zone for a long time.
>
> An authoritiative server operator knows what the consequence of setting
> SOA RDATA fields is. It isn't the
On Sat, Dec 02, 2017 at 08:09:25PM +0530, Mukund Sivaraman wrote:
> I don't agree a downstream cache has authoritiative say about extending
> TTLs (except exceptional circumstances where the authority is
> unreachable ~serve-stale).
I will note that this WG spent a fair amount of effort on RFC
On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 01:12:34PM -0500,
Steve Crocker wrote
a message of 41 lines which said:
> Shortening TTLs increases the amount of traffic between the recursive
> resolvers and authoritative resolvers and lengthens the response time for
> some queries. However, I