On 2013-12-06, at 12:11 , Chris Thompson wrote:
>
> The sense in which BIND "forces use of TCP" is that when it gets an
> IXFR request over UDP, it always just replies with the current SOA.
> It doesn't bother to work out whether an incremental transfer is
> possible and if so whether it would
On Dec 5 2013, Matthew Pounsett wrote:
On 2013-12-05, at 01:37 , Mark Andrews wrote:
Note, named will for the use of TCP in its UDP response.
s/for/force/
Always? Regardless of response size? Interesting. What's the rationale
for doing it that way?
Just to clarify, RFC 1995
On 06.12.13 15:52, sumsum 2000 wrote:
I am having only a forward only option in bind configuration.
When i dig on some host which has CNAME, the cache contains a longer TTL
for the CNAME than the TTL for the final resolution of the IP.
Yes, every record has its own TTL, including every record
Hi,
I am having only a forward only option in bind configuration.
When i dig on some host which has CNAME, the cache contains a longer TTL
for the CNAME than the TTL for the final resolution of the IP.
However, in the example below, the CNAME is queried again when the TTL
for a336.g.akamai.net
4 matches
Mail list logo