On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 01:50:34PM +0800, ?? <[email protected]> wrote a message of 49 lines which said:
> When I dig example.com soa, I got the following answer: ... > example.com. 86400 IN SOA NS1.example.com. > root.example.com. 2010091701 3600 900 604800 3600 Fresh from the authoritative name server so TTL is the original value. > Then I dig noexist.example.com a, I got this: ... > example.com. 3600 IN SOA NS1.example.com. > root.example.com. 2010091701 3600 900 604800 3600 "Artificial" value for the TTL, per RFC 2308, section 3. Nothing to do with the value Unbound has in its cache. > I dig noexist.example.com again, the ttl of the soa record changed: ... > example.com. 86292 IN SOA NS1.example.com. > root.example.com. 2010091701 3600 900 604800 3600 Original TTL of the SOA record, minus the 108 seconds elapsed between the two tests. Not normal, should be 3600 again. > Whether the second answer should use the original ttl of the soa > record? I agree with you. _______________________________________________ Unbound-users mailing list [email protected] http://unbound.nlnetlabs.nl/mailman/listinfo/unbound-users
