> On Aug 24, 2018, at 2:59 PM, Ted Lemon <mel...@fugue.com> wrote: > > On Aug 24, 2018, at 2:43 PM, Tom Pusateri <pusat...@bangj.com > <mailto:pusat...@bangj.com>> wrote: >> 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. > > The issue here is that this is a pretty major change to the DNS. If we > really want something this heavy, we should have a good reason for wanting > it. That's all. > > The idea that some unnamed DHCP server somewhere doesn't do the right thing > with cleaning up stale entries doesn't seem like a good enough reason, > particularly given that the DHCID record tags the thing as having been added > by the DHCP server, and considering that there are several open source > implementations that do automatically delete records when the lease expires. > > I think it might make sense to just wait on this. I agree that it's an > interesting idea for completeness, but we don't have enough operational > experience yet to know whether we have a problem worth solving. With > respect to the DHCP use case, I'm certain we don't. > > The good news is that if we do need this, you've done a design, and we also > have Paul's design to look at. So if operational experience a few years > down the road shows us that we have a gap here, we can move on it pretty > easily. I just don't see any reason to rush into it.
Ok, great. Hopefully others have some use cases they can share. In the mean time, back to learning Rust… Thanks, Tom
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
