Re: Efficacy of using short timeout values for an A record

2012-02-14 Thread Alan Clegg
On 2/14/2012 1:42 PM, Chuck Swiger wrote: ISC's BIND has (or had) a MINTTL value of 5 minutes / 300 seconds. It's probably unreasonable to expect other platforms to refetch DNS records faster than that. Uh... no. BIND has always respected TTL when caching information. AlanC --

Re: Efficacy of using short timeout values for an A record

2012-02-14 Thread Chris Buxton
Mac OS X imposes a 60 second minimum on TTLs, or at least it did at one time. I am unaware of any other client OS having such a restriction. Client software does not always respect TTLs, though. It's entirely possible for a client application to completely ignore the TTL value and continue to

Re: Efficacy of using short timeout values for an A record

2012-02-14 Thread Chuck Swiger
On Feb 14, 2012, at 11:11 AM, Alan Clegg wrote: On 2/14/2012 1:42 PM, Chuck Swiger wrote: ISC's BIND has (or had) a MINTTL value of 5 minutes / 300 seconds. It's probably unreasonable to expect other platforms to refetch DNS records faster than that. Uh... no. BIND has always respected

Re: Efficacy of using short timeout values for an A record

2012-02-14 Thread Chris Buxton
On Feb 14, 2012, at 11:23 AM, Chuck Swiger wrote: On Feb 14, 2012, at 11:11 AM, Alan Clegg wrote: On 2/14/2012 1:42 PM, Chuck Swiger wrote: ISC's BIND has (or had) a MINTTL value of 5 minutes / 300 seconds. It's probably unreasonable to expect other platforms to refetch DNS records faster

Re: Query Regarding NSEC RR in DNSSEC

2012-02-14 Thread Marco Davids
Hello Gaurav, You might want to have a look at our whitepaper on 'authenticated denial of existence' to gain better understanding of this somewhat complicated aspect of the DNSSEC specification: https://www.sidn.nl/fileadmin/docs/PDF-files_UK/wp-2011-0x01-v2.pdf Regards, -- Marco On

Re: bind dies with assertion failure

2012-02-14 Thread Michael Graff
It is a known issue, and is indeed a bug. We're working on it already, so stay tuned. --Michael On Feb 14, 2012, at 12:44 PM, Alex wrote: Hi, I have a fedora16 x86_64 box and named keeps dying with an assertion failure: 14-Feb-2012 13:24:41.137 general: critical: rbtdb.c:1619:

Re: Efficacy of using short timeout values for an A record

2012-02-14 Thread Mark Andrews
In message 0b215138-0162-4fe0-835a-9fc611a6e...@mac.com, Chuck Swiger writes: On Feb 14, 2012, at 2:59 AM, goran kent wrote: I need to setup an A record for a machine who's IP might change unexpectedly, and I need to ensure PCs out there cache it for as short a time as possible:

Re: Efficacy of using short timeout values for an A record

2012-02-14 Thread Chuck Swiger
On Feb 14, 2012, at 2:16 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: ISC's BIND has (or had) a MINTTL value of 5 minutes / 300 seconds. It's probably unreasonable to expect other platforms to refetch DNS records faster than that. To the best of my knowlege this is just plain wrong. Look at BIND-4.8.3 and

Re: Efficacy of using short timeout values for an A record

2012-02-14 Thread Mark Andrews
In message 4a96bb45-eacb-4252-89c6-34061849c...@mac.com, Chuck Swiger writes: On Feb 14, 2012, at 2:16 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: ISC's BIND has (or had) a MINTTL value of 5 minutes / 300 seconds. It's probably unreasonable to expect other platforms to refetch DNS records faster than that.

Can i use my custom root hint file

2012-02-14 Thread vishesh kumar
Hi All For My internal DNS setup i want to create a internal root hint file . Should i follow the pattern of standard root hint file ? Thanks Regards Vishesh Kumar ___ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe