In message <[email protected]>, Tony Finch writes: > John Dickinson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I support this draft. One thing that jumped out to me was there appears > > to be no mention of NSEC/NSEC3 chain management when adding/removing > > records. > > Even if the slave is able to work out what the necessary changes are to > the NSEC chain, the master is still going to have to send the new RRSIG > records. So I don't think there would be much saving from adding special > cases for NSEC and NSEC3.
NSEC is a singleton record. Adding a new one indicates a implicit deletion of any other NSEC record at that name. This does not indicate that all NSEC deletes can be removed from the IXFR stream, when constructing a MIXFR stream, only those with a matching addition. Adding a NSEC3 record causes a implicit deletion of the existing NSEC3 with matching parameters. This does not indicate that all NSEC3 deletes can be remove from the IXFR stream, when constructing a MIXFR stream, only those with a matching addition. > Tony. > -- > f.anthony.n.finch <[email protected]> http://dotat.at/ > Southwest Forties, Cromarty, Forth, Tyne, Dogger: Variable 4 becoming > southerly or southeasterly 4 or 5, occasionally 6 later. Slight becoming > moderate. Showers. Good, occasionally moderate. > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: [email protected] _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
