On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 10:52:49 -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote > > From: "listmail" <listm...@entertech.com> > > > > I'm investigating the failure of a slave server during a network outage at a > > primary server. > > > > The SOA TTL was 1 week on most zones, but the individual records had short > > TTLs, on the order of an hour. The outage lasted long enough for these > > shorter > > TTLs to expire. > > > > My question is: Will a BIND slave server stop serving RRs when their > > individual TTLs have expired, or only when the SOA TTL has expired? > > Bill, > > You are getting issues confused. TTL is the time for a server to > cache data for which it is not authoritative. For an authoritative > server TTL is irrelevant. Also, the TTL in the SOA is the TTL for > negative cache entries, not cached data. (And, if the server is > authoritative, it is NOT cached data.) > I guess I didn't state my question very well. When I referred to the SOA TTL, I was referring to the "expire" field, not the negative cache timeout field.
> The relevant field in the SOA is the "expire' field. If the server > has either transferred the zone from the master server or confirmed (via > serial #) that the current data is still current. If the data is > expired, the slave will stop serving it. Until then, it will serve it > and TTL has absolutely nothing to do with this. > So is this correct: A slave will continue serving RRs regardless of their TTL, as long as the "expire" value in the SOA has not expired? If true, I need another theory as to why the slave stopped serving records. Thanks, --Bill _______________________________________________ bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
