On 8. 10. 2013, at 20:13, Paul Wouters <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Doug Barton wrote: > >> What's actually missing is a signaling mechanism from the child to the >> parent. > > Google for "timers versus triggers". We had that discussion years ago. > It ended up in a stalemate and we continued on the bases that we should > put the message in the zone because there was no agreement on how or > whom should do the work when. By putting the data in the, a zone reload > can trigger a push, and a parent can do a check based on its own timers. > > Additionally, any other type of trigger signaling needs some new port > that's not port 53 or some parental server that is not the production > TLD server to answer to the trigger. TLDs weren't willing to do either. > > So I disagree. We do not need a new signaling mechanism.
We also have a signaling mechanism... We can just somewhat abuse the DNS Update mechanism to send DNS UPDATE to parent master (from SOA) server with DNSKEYs + RRSIGs as contents of the DNS UPDATE message. O. -- Ondřej Surý -- Chief Science Officer ------------------------------------------- CZ.NIC, z.s.p.o. -- Laboratoře CZ.NIC Americka 23, 120 00 Praha 2, Czech Republic mailto:[email protected] http://nic.cz/ tel:+420.222745110 fax:+420.222745112 -------------------------------------------
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
