Re: [DNSOP] Measuring DNS TTL Violations in the wild

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 < >

Re: [DNSOP] Please review in terminology-bis: In-bailiwick, Out-of-bailiwick, In-domain, Sibling domain

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

Re: [DNSOP] Measuring DNS TTL Violations in the wild

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

Re: [DNSOP] Measuring DNS TTL Violations in the wild

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

Re: [DNSOP] Measuring DNS TTL clamping in the wild

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