> Great: I mean in term of explaining - however I am not sure it > should not call for a TTO (Time to Obsolecence) to be specified?
This was added just to convey the time frame, that is, "months or years" rather than "every hour". I'll change it to be a bit more vague..
Oh! I try to get the text more specific!
What I mean is that if you introduce a new concept in the DNS affecting the availability/existance of the RRs you should make ita very precise feature. From what I gather the TTO would be the delay before non called entry should be discarded. I think the concept is great as it may really help managers tracing their own mismanagement.
But :
1. I do not know where it is to be introduced because I do not
see easily how it may survive a reload (we are talking of the
master file management). This means an associated base
keeping the date of the last use and called at loading time.2. this would pemit a feature I want for a long in the DNS, which
is temporary names for security/ebusiness purposes. If I set
a TTO of 15 minutes and a TTL of 5 minutes on a Dynamic
entry : the name will be valid for 20 minutes maximum on the
network.jfc
. dnsop resources:_____________________________________________________ web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop.html mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop/index.html
