Paul Hoffman writes: > Greetings again. draft-ietf-dnsop-serve-stale has a few places where > it suggest ranges for values, but these suggestions are vague.
"Vague"? They give hard numbers with the intended flexibility for the considerations that might go into them. > Could be: > Values SHOULD > be capped to 604,800 seconds, and implementations SHOULD allow > lower values to be configured by operators. Do we really have to suggest to implementers that this be configurable, especially when all of the major packages already have such a knob, afaik? > Could be: > When returning a response containing stale records, the recursive > resolver MUST set the TTL of each expired record in the message to a > value greater than 0, with 30 seconds RECOMMENDED. Implementations > SHOULD allow values above 0, but SHOULD NOT allow values greater > than 600 seconds. This one looks useful, suggesting a reasonable cap on the order of minutes rather than much longer. I'm happy to make the change. > The maximum stale timer should be > configurable, and defines the length of time after a record expires > that it should be retained in the cache. The value SHOULD be > one day, and SHOULD NOT be longer than 3 days. All 2119 normative language was removed from that section. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
