I haven't been following the current thread but I have encountered this topic before and I have thought about the implications for DNSSEC.
The terminology of "split DNS" -- and equivalently "split horizon DNS" -- is, in my opinion, a bit limited. It's not too hard to imagine further carve outs. For me, the general case is at every point in the network, there is an external world and an internal world. Let's say I am in charge of the systems that support a department within a division of a very large company. I could imagine a department DNS that resolves names within the department but forwards other queries to the division DNS resolvers. They resolve names within the division and forward other queries to the company's resolvers. The company's resolvers handle queries for names defined by the company and forward other queries to the outside. If we're going to tackle this problem, let's do it cleanly and completely. Steve On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 5:14 PM, Paul Wouters <p...@nohats.ca> wrote: > On Mon, 19 Mar 2018, John Heidemann wrote: > > +1 on "split-horizon dns" as the term, over "split dns" and some other >> neologism, on the basis of running code and existing documentation and >> existing wide use. >> > > I and google disagree: > > "split dns": 72900 hits > "split horizon dns": 5640 hits > > > If the document is about explaining terminology, it must explain "split > dns" and can say another term for it is "split horizon dns", but not the > other way around. > > I personally don't hear (or use) "split horizon dns" > > Paul > > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
