Joe Abley (jabley) writes:
>
> Consider the various approaches used by ISC and others to populate a
> zone with data that can be extracted by a nameserver and used to
> configure itself, for example. No protocol there -- more like a zone
> schema.
I am certain that most of the requirements defined in the draft can
be implemented as third-party tools, and totally out of band with
regards to the nameserver software itself. Some of the other stuff
involving views, for example, will require some level of integration
with the nameserver. By that I mean that the tools will need
some knowledge of what features are implemented by the nameserver,
maybe through some sort of capability negotiation.
We were focusing primarily on zone management when we wrote the
draft, as I consider them to be implementation neutral. One
way could be to have some sort of one schema, or pseudo-zone,
call it "._conf" Clients implementing the protocol could listen to
updates on the "._conf" zone, and reconfigure the nameserver as
required (adding or removing a zone if it appeared in the pseudo-zone,
for instance).
Things like nameserver configuration, runtime options and health
reporting are definitely nameserver specific. But to avoid hitting
a wall too early, we might as well address these things now.
Phil
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
