Hi everybody,
Your input on the initial implementation described below would be most
appreciated. I see this as a dns operations issue since it does not
describe an on-the wire change, except when we do AXFR perhaps. It is
mostly a feature.
However, even features could have interoperability
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 08:13:46AM -0700, Paul Hoffman wrote:
- What happens / should happen if the @ IN MX 25 outpost.ds9a.nl. record
is not in the zone file and the server gets an MX query for example.com?
It proxies that on as an MX query for www.powerdns.com and puts back the
answer. So
bert hubert mailto:bert.hub...@netherlabs.nl
Sunday, September 21, 2014 4:52 AM
...
PS: the above is currently not yet supported for DNSSEC domains!
i'd be very interested in a standards-track (interoperable; including
DNSSEC support and AXFR/IXFR) version of this feature. my hope is that
On 21 September 2014 19:14, bert hubert bert.hub...@netherlabs.nl wrote:
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 08:13:46AM -0700, Paul Hoffman wrote:
PS: the above is currently not yet supported for DNSSEC domains!
Can you say (much) more about that aside? Does it mean that the server
An interesting
Hi,
This topic has come up here many times before, and there always seems to be
interest. A fielded implementation and Paul's suggestion of an interoperable
spec both seem like healthy developments.
Suzanne
On Sep 21, 2014, at 2:37 PM, Paul Vixie p...@redbarn.org wrote:
bert
On 9/21/14 1:14 PM, Suzanne Woolf wrote:
Hi,
This topic has come up here many times before, and there always seems to
be interest. A fielded implementation and Paul's suggestion of an
interoperable spec both seem like healthy developments.
As always I stand ready to revive
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 9/21/14 2:04 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
| On 9/21/14 1:14 PM, Suzanne Woolf wrote:
| Hi,
|
| This topic has come up here many times before, and there always
| seems to be interest. A fielded implementation and Paul's
| suggestion of an interoperable
On Sep 21, 2014, at 2:04 PM, Doug Barton do...@dougbarton.us wrote:
On 9/21/14 1:14 PM, Suzanne Woolf wrote:
This topic has come up here many times before,
And like the joke about the weather...
and there always seems to
be interest. A fielded implementation
There are at least three
David Conrad mailto:d...@virtualized.org
Sunday, September 21, 2014 2:10 PM
...
There are at least three implementations of 'alias mechanism for zone apex'
I'm aware of (DNS Made Easy's ANAME, PowerDNS's ANAME (same thing?), and
CloudFlare's CNAME Flattening). Not sure if they
Paul,
On Sep 21, 2014, at 2:23 PM, Paul Vixie p...@redbarn.org wrote:
(or even if there is a need for interoperability)
i don't think it makes sense to question, inside the IETF, whether a
vendor-independent interoperable standard is desirable.
Who said anything about desirability?
The
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Paul Vixie p...@redbarn.org wrote:
i'd be very interested in a standards-track (interoperable; including
DNSSEC support and AXFR/IXFR) version of this feature. my hope is that you
will remove out-of-zone capability here, that is, the target of ALIAS
should
On Sep 21, 2014, at 5:10 PM, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote:
On Sep 21, 2014, at 2:04 PM, Doug Barton do...@dougbarton.us wrote:
On 9/21/14 1:14 PM, Suzanne Woolf wrote:
This topic has come up here many times before,
And like the joke about the weather...
and there always seems
12 matches
Mail list logo
