On 04/18/2012 04:04 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 15:29 +0200, Petr Spacek wrote:

first of all - snippet moved from the end:
  >  I think we need to try to be more consistent than what we are now. There
  >  may always be minor races, but the current races are too big to pass on
  >  IMHO.
I definitely agree. Current state = completely broken zone transfer.

Rest is in-line.

On 04/17/2012 06:13 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Tue, 2012-04-17 at 17:49 +0200, Petr Spacek wrote:

there is IPA ticket #2554 "DNS zone serial number is not updated" [1],
which is required by RFE "Support zone transfers in bind-dyndb-ldap" [2].

I think we need to discuss next steps with this issue:

Basic support for zone transfers is already done in bind-dyndb-ldap. We
need second part - correct behaviour during SOA serial number update.

Bind-dyndb-ldap plugin handles dynamic update in correct way (each
update increment serial #), so biggest problem lays in IPA for now.

Modifying SOA serial number can be pretty hard, because of DS
replication. There are potential race conditions, if records are
modified/added/deleted on two or more places, replication takes some
time (because of network connection latency/problem) and zone transfer
is started in meanwhile.

Question is: How consistent we want to be?

Enough, what we want to do is stop updating the SOA from bind-dyndb-ldap
and instead update it in a DS plugin. That's because a DS plugin is the
only thing that can see entries coming in from multiple servers.
If you update the SOA from bind-dyndb-ldap you can potentially set it
back in time because last write win in DS.

This will require a persistent sarch so bind-dyndb-ldap can be updated
with the last SOA serial number, or bind-dyndb-ldap must not cache it
and always try to fetch it from ldap.

Bind-dyndb-ldap has users with OpenLDAP. I googled a bit and OpenLDAP should
support Netscape SLAPI [3][4], but I don't know how hard is to code
interoperable plugin.
Accidentally I found existing SLAPI plugin for "concurrent" BIND-LDAP backend
project [5].

I don't think we need to provide plugins for other platforms, we just
need an optiono in bind-dyndb-ldap to tell it to assume the SOA is being
handled by the LDAP server.
For servers that do not have a suitable plugin bind-dyndb-ldap will keep
working as it does now. In those cases I would suggest people to use a
single master, but up to the integrator of the other solution.

Can we think for a while about another ways? I would like to find some (even
sub-optimal) solution without DS plugin, if it's possible and comparable hard
to code.

Yes, as I said you may still do something with a persistent search, but
I do not know if persistent searches are available in OpenLDAP either.
OpenLDAP has support for (newer and standardized) SyncRepl [6][7]. I plan to look into it and consider writing some compatibility layer for psearch/syncrepl in bind-dyndb-ldap. It should not be hard, I think.

However with a persistent search you would see entries coming in in
"real time" even replicated ones from other replicas, so you could
always issue a SOA serial update. Of course you still need to check for
SOA serial updates from other DNS master servers where another
bind-dyndb-ldap plugin is running.

You have N servers potentially updating the serial at the same time. As
long as you do not update the serial just because the serial was itself
updated you are just going to eat one or more serial numbers off.

We also do not need to make it a requirement to have the serial updated
atomically. If 2 servers both update the number to the same value it is
ok because they will basically be both in sync in terms of hosted

Otherwise one of the servers will update the serial again as soon as
other entries are received.

If this happens, it is possible that on one of the masters the serial
will be updated twice even though no other change was performed on the
entry-set. That is not a big deal though, at most it will cause a
useless zone transfer, but zone transfer should already be somewhat rate
limited anyway, because our zones do change frequently due to DNS
updates from clients.
SOA record has also refresh, retry and expiry fields. These define how often zone transfer should happen. It's nicely described in [8].

There is next problem with transfers: Currently we support only full zone transfers (AXFR), not incremental updates (IXFR), because there is no "last record change"<->SOA# information. For now it's postponed, because nobody wanted it.

   Can we accept these
absolutely improbable race conditions? It will be probably corrected by
next SOA update = by (any) next record change. It won't affect normal
operations, only zone transfers.

Yes and No, the problem is that if 2 servers update the SOA
independently you may have the serial go backwards on replication. See

(IMHO we should consider DNS "nature": In general is not strictly
consistent, because of massive caching at every level.)

True, but the serial is normally considered monotonically increasing.

I agree. How DS will handle collisions? When same attribute is modified
independently at two places? It's simply overwritten by one of values? I can't
find information about this at directory.fedoraproject.org.

Last update wins.
Good to know, thanks. I wrongly expected some kind of warning mechanism. (Special operational attribute or something like that.)

(Side question: It's a real big problem? If it's result of very improbable
race condition? It will broke zone transfer, but next zone update will correct
this. As result of this failure last change is not transferred to slave DNS
servers, before another zone update takes place.)

If there are no new updates the next zone transfer will see again a
serial in the past and not update at all. So, yeah I think it is a big
deal if the SOA goes backwards.

If it's acceptable, we can suppress explicit SOA serial number value in
LDAP and derive actual value from latest modifyTimestamp value from all
objects in cn=dns subtree. This approach saves some hooks in IPA's LDAP
update code and will save problems with manual modifications.

It will cause a big search though. It also will not take in account when
If we use persistent search it's not a problem. Persistent search dumps whole
DB to RBT in BIND's memory and only changes are transferred after this initial

You still need to search the whole cache and save additional data. (I
sure hope you do not keep in memory the whole ldap object but a parsed
version of it, if you keep the whole LDAP object I think we just found
another place for enhancement. Wasting all that memory is not a good
idea IMO).
Only DNS records are stored, i.e. parsed objects.

Please, can you explain "You still need to search the whole cache and save additional data."? I probably missed some important point.

We can compute maximal modifyTimestamp from all idnsRecord objects during
initial query. Any change later in time will add only single attribute to
transfer + max(currvalue, newvalue) operation. This way (with psearch) has
reasonably small overhead, I think.

The problem is that max(currvalue, newvalue) is not useful.

This is the scenario:

time 1: server A receives updates
time 2: server B receives updates
time 3: bind-dyndb-ldap B computes new SOA
time 4: server A sends its updates to server B
time 5: bind-dyndb-ldap B see that the max timestamp has not changed
(all new entries are older than 'time 2' as they were generated at time

This is with perfectly synchronized clocks. If A has a clock slightly in
the past compared to B then you could eve swap time 1 and 2 in absolute
time and still get entries "in the past" at point 4.

This is why using the modifyTimestamp is not workable in this case.
Ok, I didn't realized these problems. Now I know why DNS has single master :-D

there are changes replicated from another replica that are "backdated"
relative to the last modifyTimestamp.
If we maintain max(modifyTimestamp) value whole time, new backdated values
will not backdate SOA, because max(modifyTimestamp) can't move back.

no the problem is not backdating the SOA serial, the problem is *not*
updating it when new entris become available because they were "in the
past". So if no other changes are made to DNS a zone transfer may not
kick at all indefinitely even though the master has new/changed entries.
This would cause a long term de-synchronization of the slaves I think is
not really acceptable.
I agree with your long-term de-synchronization point, but with dynamic updates is not really probable.

It's not correct behaviour also, I know. But again: It's result of improbable
race condition and next zone update will correct this situation.

It is not improbable at all, I think it would be a pretty common
situation when you have different masters updating the same zone (common
on the main zone), see explanation above.

Also using modifyTimestamp would needlessly increment the SOA if there
are changes to the entries that are not relevant to DNS (like admins
changing ACIs, or other actions like that).
I think it's not a problem. Only consequence is unnecessary zone transfer. How
often admin changes ACI?

Not often, so I concede the point.

If we want to save this overhead, we can count max(modifyTimestamp) only for
idnsRecord objects (and only for known attributes) - but I think it's not

I was already expecting that, but you cannot distinguish modifyTimestamp
per attribute, only per object, so if modifyTimestamp is changed for an
attribute you do not care about you still have to count it.
AFAIK you can watch changes only for selected attributes (through psearch).

There are still problems to solve without DS plugin (specifically
mapping/updating NN part from YYYYMMDDNN), but: Sounds this reasonable?

Well I am not sure we need to use a YYYYMMDDNN convention to start with.
I expect with DYNDNS updates that a 2 digit NN will never be enough,
plus it is never updated by a human so we do not need to keep it
readable. But I do not care eiither way, as long as the serial can
handle thousands of updates per day I am fine (if this is an issue we
need to understand how to update the serial in time intervals).
Current BIND implementation handles overflow in one day gracefully:
2012041899 -> 2012041900
So SOA# can be in far future, if you changes zone too often :-)

AFAIK this format is traditional, but not required by standard, if arithmetic works. [9] defines arithmetic for SOA serials, so DS plugin should follow it.

It says "The maximum defined increment is 2147483647 (2^31 - 1)"
This limit applies inside to one SOA TTL time window (so it shouldn't be a problem, I think). I didn't looked into in this RFC deeply. Some practical recommendations can be found in [10].

Thanks for your time.

Petr^2 Spacek

[6] http://www.openldap.org/doc/admin24/replication.html
[7] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4533
[8] http://www.zytrax.com/books/dns/ch8/soa.html
[9] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1982
[10] http://www.zytrax.com/books/dns/ch9/serial.html


Freeipa-devel mailing list

Reply via email to