It seems odd to take the position that the authoritative server shouldn’t need to clean up stale entries because it assumes the client will do it for you. I can’t imagine you taking this position under any other scenario.
Thanks, Tom > On Aug 24, 2018, at 2:33 PM, Tom Pusateri <pusat...@bangj.com> wrote: > > Sorry, I never surveyed the set of inconsiderate DCHP servers. > > Thanks, > Tom > > On Aug 24, 2018, at 2:04 PM, Ted Lemon <mel...@fugue.com > <mailto:mel...@fugue.com>> wrote: > >> Can you give us an example? >> >> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 1:56 PM Tom Pusateri <pusat...@bangj.com >> <mailto:pusat...@bangj.com>> wrote: >> Sure. It’s not the thoughtful, well-behaved implementations that we worry >> about. It’s the ones that aren’t. This is a protection mechanism. (Belt AND >> suspenders..) >> >> Thanks, >> Tom >> >> >>> On Aug 24, 2018, at 1:36 PM, Ted Lemon <mel...@fugue.com >>> <mailto:mel...@fugue.com>> wrote: >>> >>> The DHCP case isn't actually a problem today. DHCP servers automatically >>> remove these records. The ISC server has been doing this for 20 years, >>> and I'm pretty sure all the other servers that compete with it do too. >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 12:50 PM, Tom Pusateri <pusat...@bangj.com >>> <mailto:pusat...@bangj.com>> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On Aug 24, 2018, at 9:54 AM, Ted Lemon <mel...@fugue.com >>>> <mailto:mel...@fugue.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Aug 24, 2018, at 9:52 AM, Tom Pusateri <pusat...@bangj.com >>>> <mailto:pusat...@bangj.com>> wrote: >>>>> Yes, it was intended to be more general than for service registration. >>>>> It’s directly applicable to name registration for IP addresses. I can add >>>>> a section on other uses if more motivation is desired. Mark Andrews had >>>>> some uses as well that hopefully, he can share. If others have uses in >>>>> mind that this solves I would love to hear about them. >>>> >>>> The reason I'm asking is not that I don't think there are theoretical use >>>> cases for what you are proposing. I'm asking if there are actual use >>>> cases. How would this be used in practice? What can't someone do right >>>> now that they need to do and that this new technology enables? >>> >>> Specifically, there are two applications mentioned in the draft. >>> >>> 1. When a DNS server receives a dynamic DNS Update from a client >>> registering its name after having received an IP address from an DHCP >>> lease, the length of the DHCP lease can be tied to the length that the DNS >>> address/PTR records stay in the authoritative server. >>> >>> 2. When an RFC 6763 DNS-SD service is registered (including PTR, SRV, & TXT >>> records), these records can timeout according to the lease lifetime >>> contained in the update lease EDNS(0) option. >>> >>> These are not theoretical. They solve practical problems that exist today. >>> I think there are others associated with existing problems for sleeping >>> devices and IoT devices that I need to research to more clearly answer your >>> specific question but I think these two already fulfill that requirement. >>> >>> Tom >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> DNSOP mailing list >>> DNSOP@ietf.org <mailto:DNSOP@ietf.org> >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop >>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> DNSOP mailing list >> DNSOP@ietf.org <mailto:DNSOP@ietf.org> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop >> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
