I tend to agree with you about the overloading of TXT records. Thanks, Ben
-----Original Message----- From: bind-users-boun...@lists.isc.org [mailto:bind-users-boun...@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of Ray Bellis Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 11:22 AM To: bind-users@lists.isc.org Subject: Re: Configuring different TTLs in multiple RRs for the same domain name, TYPE, and CLASS On 24/03/2016 16:18, Ben Bridges wrote: > TXT records are multiple-purpose. They can be used for SPF records, > Office 365 "MS" records, DMARC records, or whatever arbitrary uses > someone dreams up, all for the same domain name. Microsoft wants a > short TTL for their Office 365 records, but I would prefer to > generally use a longer TTL for most records (including other TXT > records) in order to reduce the query load on our servers. It would > be nice to be able to set a short TTL for the Office 365 record but a > longer TTL for other TXT records for the same domain name. OK, I can see why you'd want that, but it's yet another reason why overloading TXT records for multiple purposes was (and remains) a bad idea :( As explained by RFC 2181, an RRset is supposed to be indivisible, and "bad things happen" if some parts of an RRset expire before others. Ray _______________________________________________ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users _______________________________________________ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
