On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 7:01 PM, Oliver Garraux wrote:
>> I need to setup an A record for a machine who's IP might change
>> unexpectedly, and I need to ensure PCs out there cache it for as short
>> a time as possible:
>>
>> host1 300 IN A 10.10.10.10
>>
>> Does anyone know whether MS windo
aster.
Recommended ! )
Kind regards,
Marc Lampo
Security Officer
EURid (for the .eu tld)
-Original Message-
From: Alan Clegg [mailto:a...@clegg.com]
Sent: 14 February 2012 08:11 PM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: Efficacy of using short timeout values for an A record
On 2/14/2
In message <4a96bb45-eacb-4252-89c6-34061849c...@mac.com>, Chuck Swiger writes:
> On Feb 14, 2012, at 2:16 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> >> ISC's BIND has (or had) a MINTTL value of 5 minutes / 300 seconds.
> >> It's probably unreasonable to expect other platforms to refetch DNS
> >> records faster th
On Feb 14, 2012, at 2:16 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>> ISC's BIND has (or had) a MINTTL value of 5 minutes / 300 seconds.
>> It's probably unreasonable to expect other platforms to refetch DNS
>> records faster than that.
>
> To the best of my knowlege this is just plain wrong.
Look at BIND-4.8.3 a
In message <0b215138-0162-4fe0-835a-9fc611a6e...@mac.com>, Chuck Swiger writes:
> On Feb 14, 2012, at 2:59 AM, goran kent wrote:
> > I need to setup an A record for a machine who's IP might change
> > unexpectedly, and I need to ensure PCs out there cache it for as short
> > a time as possible:
>
On Feb 14, 2012, at 11:23 AM, Chuck Swiger wrote:
On Feb 14, 2012, at 11:11 AM, Alan Clegg wrote:
>> On 2/14/2012 1:42 PM, Chuck Swiger wrote:
>>
>>> ISC's BIND has (or had) a MINTTL value of 5 minutes / 300 seconds.
>>> It's probably unreasonable to expect other platforms to refetch DNS
>>> recor
On Feb 14, 2012, at 11:11 AM, Alan Clegg wrote:
> On 2/14/2012 1:42 PM, Chuck Swiger wrote:
>
>> ISC's BIND has (or had) a MINTTL value of 5 minutes / 300 seconds.
>> It's probably unreasonable to expect other platforms to refetch DNS
>> records faster than that.
>
> Uh... no. BIND has always re
Mac OS X imposes a 60 second minimum on TTLs, or at least it did at one time. I
am unaware of any other client OS having such a restriction.
Client software does not always respect TTLs, though. It's entirely possible
for a client application to completely ignore the TTL value and continue to
c
On 2/14/2012 1:42 PM, Chuck Swiger wrote:
> ISC's BIND has (or had) a MINTTL value of 5 minutes / 300 seconds.
> It's probably unreasonable to expect other platforms to refetch DNS
> records faster than that.
Uh... no. BIND has always respected TTL when caching information.
AlanC
--
a...@clegg
On Feb 14, 2012, at 2:59 AM, goran kent wrote:
> I need to setup an A record for a machine who's IP might change
> unexpectedly, and I need to ensure PCs out there cache it for as short
> a time as possible:
>
>host1300 IN A 10.10.10.10
>
> Does anyone know whether MS windows PCs will in
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 5:59 AM, goran kent wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I need to setup an A record for a machine who's IP might change
> unexpectedly, and I need to ensure PCs out there cache it for as short
> a time as possible:
>
> host1 300 IN A 10.10.10.10
>
> Does anyone know whether MS windows
11 matches
Mail list logo
