|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded
[ On Friday, February 2, 2001 at 12:48:50 (+0100), Pim van Riezen wrote: ] > Subject: Re: [NANOG] Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded > > > [snip serving borken zones is bad] > > I am near to agreeing with you if it were about not picking up a > zone-change when the zonefile has turned bogus. However, the effect of a > zone no longer being authoritative on the primary is not really what I'd > define as fun either :). Well, strictly speaking not dropping the zone when any error is encountered during its load is contrary to the requirements of RFC 1035. (section 5.2, which gives very much the reasons I did, but without mentioning zone transfers explicitly since of course any errant record, or missing record, can be propogated for its TTL or negative TTL) It might not be fun to have your primary be lame for one or zillions of zones (even if it's an unadvertised primary), but it's not dangerous (at least not unless you're already violating dozens of other DNS requirements). The "non-fun" should merely be incentive to get you to correct your procedures and process so that future errors are caught before they're loaded. :-) -- Greg A. Woods +1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <[email protected]> <robohack!woods> Planix, Inc. <[email protected]>; Secrets of the Weird <[email protected]>
|