> David C Lawrence <mailto:[email protected]> > Tuesday, December 30, 2014 11:54 AM > Paul Vixie writes: > >> violating other people's reasonable assumptions meanwhile shouldn't >> be an option. > > For what it's worth, the "TTLs are inviolable" ship sailed long ago. > Both ends of the TTL are already monkeyed with by local policy across > the Internet. BIND has had max-cache-ttl for a very long time.
TTL is the longest you can keep something. keeping it for less time than that is not just allowed, it's expected, either due to cache replacement, or restart, or local policy. that's not "monkeying" in the way i think you mean it. on the other hand the min-cache-ttl which BIND also had (in BIND8) was "monkeying" since it placed a hard five minute floor on how long information could be held. i regretted this and BIND9 does not have it. > Web > browsers similarly for a very long time have kept local caches with > minimum TTLs that the vast majority of people are not even aware. my web browser (chrome, at the moment) does not keep information longer than my authority TTL's, but i admit that i am not a CDN and none of my TTL's are less than 30 seconds. it may be that if you want five seconds you can't get it, but i wouldn't be seeing that here. > >> see also: [2]<http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=1242499>. > > Great article. Thanks for writing it. i'd love to see you write the next chapter of that story, giving the CDN perspective. see also: <http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2009/12/52835-what-dns-is-not/fulltext> -- Paul Vixie
_______________________________________________ dns-operations mailing list [email protected] https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations dns-jobs mailing list https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-jobs
