|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: dns based loadbalancing/failover
> The way to go about this is to see if breaking existing practice will break > current implementations and plausible future implementations. Allow me to apologize, once again, to Microsoft. In the NT 3.5.1 resource kit they shipped a DNS server which had to do its zone transfers one record per message since "existing practice" and "current implementations" meant BIND4 which knew no other way. Fortunately we didn't write a BCP describing BIND4's deviant behaviour, but rather, fixed it in BIND8 and beyond. > > If that's not the case, though, consider that a correct implementation of > > DNS would be within its rights to take note of the "same serial number but > > incoherent answers" condition and declare the zone unreachable. I'm not > > Would be pretty silly, and overstepping the robustness principle. Whether behaviour is robust enough to be called a BCP or not is fodder for a detailed analysis amongst people who *want* to study and debate such things. That mailing list, for DNS, is called [email protected] (Not NANOG.) > So by your logic, by making sure that the serial numbers never match, we > would 'unbreak' the situation? Seems like a step in the wrong direction. There is, simply is and we're not going to argue about it, an identity mapping between a zone's contents and a zone's serial number. If you don't like that then you should find a way to change it. Which direction is "wrong" is better discussed on [email protected] than here.
|