On 9/12/07, bert hubert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 05:55:06AM +1000, Richard McLean wrote:
> > At 12:51 PM -0700 12/9/07, Augie Schwer wrote:
> > >Alternatively Bind seems to note the non-authoritative answer from its
> > >master and add the domain into a some list (neg. c
At 10:01 PM +0200 12/9/07, bert hubert wrote:
Hehe - we had this discussion some time ago and then the conclusion was
the exact reverse, that people did not appreciate the DNS 'feature' of
expiring a domain in case of the master being unavailable.
For PowerDNS, implementing this requires actual
Hi all,
> > No, I'd say it sounds like a problem too. Having this feature would
be
> > a great addition (and the more "correct" behaviour) for us.
>
> Hehe - we had this discussion some time ago and then the conclusion
was
> the
> exact reverse, that people did not appreciate the DNS 'feature' of
On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 05:55:06AM +1000, Richard McLean wrote:
> At 12:51 PM -0700 12/9/07, Augie Schwer wrote:
> >Alternatively Bind seems to note the non-authoritative answer from its
> >master and add the domain into a some list (neg. cache, etc.) and not
> >answer authoritatively for it.
> >
>
At 12:51 PM -0700 12/9/07, Augie Schwer wrote:
Alternatively Bind seems to note the non-authoritative answer from its
master and add the domain into a some list (neg. cache, etc.) and not
answer authoritatively for it.
Am I wrong in thinking this is a problem?
No, I'd say it sounds like a pro
PowerDNS doesn't seem to enforce any kind of expiry of domains whose
master no longer answer authoritatively, so PowerDNS was a slave, but
should no longer be because the master it was slaving from went away,
but because it never expires the domain it continues to answer
authoritatively.
Alternati
