The default TTL should be 300 secs, esp with everyone switching A records
to cloud providers, imho.
That way, who ever is the SOA and the zone master, can update it based on
design scale or sla of that provider.
DNS needs a protocol refresh anyways.
Dennis B.
On Apr 16, 2014 7:30 PM, John Peach
Hello,
Not sure where to point this... I was wondering if anybody knows an inroad
to reach ATT and Verizon systems people to flush their caches for
proofpoint.com?
Any help is greatly appreciated!
Steven Briggs
ᐧ
The generally accepted and scalable way to accomplish this is to advertise your
freshness preferences using the SOA record of your domain. It would be pretty
tricky to make this work with a swivel chair type system for every domain and
host on the internet. You would have to contact every
Yeah...I know. Unfortunately, the domain was mishandled by our
registrar, who imposed their own TTLs on our zone, THEN turned it back over
to us with a 48HR TTL. Which is very bad.
I really appreciate all of your help, guys!
ᐧ
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Laszlo Hanyecz
At 10:21 16/04/2014 -0600, Steven Briggs wrote:
Been discussed and nothing has been done:
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/87/slides/slides-87-dnsop-8.pdf
https://www.dns-oarc.net/files/workshop-201005/DNS-Emergency-Alert-System.pdf
Will keep happening until someone decides to act.
-Hank
Seems like the DNS protocol already addresses this issue with TTLs. The
issue is that people sometimes regret the TTLs they chose (or their
service provider chose for them). Any reason registrars commonly choose
a 2 day TTL? Would they be just as well off with a 1 day TTL (my guess
is that
On Wed, 16 Apr 2014 10:21:34 -0600, Steven Briggs said:
Yeah...I know. Unfortunately, the domain was mishandled by our
registrar, who imposed their own TTLs on our zone, THEN turned it back over
to us with a 48HR TTL. Which is very bad.
That's almost calling for a name-and-shame.
: Wednesday, April 16, 2014 12:57 PM
To: Steven Briggs
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: ATT / Verizon DNS Flush?
On Wed, 16 Apr 2014 10:21:34 -0600, Steven Briggs said:
Yeah...I know. Unfortunately, the domain was mishandled by our
registrar, who imposed their own TTLs on our zone, THEN turned
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 11:56 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Wed, 16 Apr 2014 10:21:34 -0600, Steven Briggs said:
Yeah...I know. Unfortunately, the domain was mishandled by our
registrar, who imposed their own TTLs on our zone, THEN turned it back over
to us with a 48HR TTL. Which is
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Jimmy Hess mysi...@gmail.com wrote:
It's not hard to use WHOIS to lookup the registrar of each of the
nameservers for proofpoint.com
(ns1.proofpoint.us, ns3.proofpoint.us).
Long TTLS are appropriate for a production zone, but in my
estimation, it is
Looks to be godaddy. No surprise then.
On Wed, 16 Apr 2014 12:56:59 -0400
valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Wed, 16 Apr 2014 10:21:34 -0600, Steven Briggs said:
Yeah...I know. Unfortunately, the domain was mishandled by our
registrar, who imposed their own TTLs on our zone, THEN turned it
11 matches
Mail list logo
