> Mark.Andrews@isc.org writes: > > Semi-synchronized changes have always been part of the DNS. > > If there's an honest proposal to modify the DNS specifications to allow > semi-synchronized changes (once again: parent zone being changed after > all the child servers have changed), perhaps the discussion will reveal > that those changes work with BIND 4, BIND 8, djbdns, etc.; that those > changes are useful; and that nobody objects to this modification. > > On the other hand, if there's an honest proposal to modify the DNS > specifications to allow _unsychronized_ changes (such as your asinine > configuration examples), the discussion will reveal that those changes > do _not_ work with the majority of DNS servers on the Internet, that > those changes are _not_ useful, and that the modification is a bad idea. > > What we have here is much worse: a thoroughly dishonest attempt to slip > the latter modification past us as part of an ``AXFR clarification.'' > Anyone with a shred of integrity should be opposing this fraud. If you want synchronized changes in the parent and child zones you need to write up a draft to explain how to do it. The current DNS does not have this capability. I would suggest that you will need to add inception and expiration times as meta data for each RR. I will be happy to review the draft when you make it available. Mark -- Mark Andrews, Internet Software Consortium 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: Mark.Andrews@isc.org