Machines die. Machines are unplugged. Server are unreachable at critical times. Externally driven cleanup can never be reliable.
-- Mark Andrews > On 22 Feb 2019, at 06:21, 神明達哉 <[email protected]> wrote: > > At Wed, 20 Feb 2019 07:51:51 -0500, > Joe Abley <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The crux of the use case seems to be that it is commonplace for names in > > the DNS to exist for short periods of time and that for some applications a > > name that overstays its welcome can cause an operational problem. > > > > While I can understand the philosophical desire to complete the UPDATE > > specification so that it is possible to engineer around this scenario, I > > don't see the practical application. > > I happen to know there's a practical application related to this > proposal.. As Mark says not all DHCP servers behave politely; there > are servers that just add RRs via DDNS and forget them. We could say > that it's a problem of poorly implemented DDNS clients, not something > that should be solved in the DNS protocol. I wouldn't necessarily be > opposed to that view. In fact, given the higher bar with the "camel" > test, I'm not yet really convinced about the need for a protocol-based > solution to this problem either. But at least this is related to a > practical problem, not just a philosophical one. > > -- > JINMEI, Tatuya > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
