Mark,
On 04/04/2018 03:52 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
Note that implicit RRSIG deletion is idempotent, so it does not matter if two
RRs in the MIXFR trigger it.
Not if you are processing the additions on a RR by RR basis. You can add a new
RRSIG
before you add the covering RR. You need to perf
> On 4 Apr 2018, at 8:26 pm, Matthijs Mekking wrote:
>
> Hi Frederico,
>
> On 04-04-18 03:32, Frederico A C Neves wrote:
>> Hi Matthijs,
>> On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 02:37:12PM +0200, Matthijs Mekking wrote:
>>> Hi Frederico,
>>>
>>> On 03/29/2018 08:45 PM, Frederico A C Neves wrote:
I was
Joe,
Thanks for sharing your concerns.
On 04-04-18 05:31, Joe Abley wrote:
On Apr 3, 2018, at 21:32, Frederico A C Neves
wrote:
On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 02:37:12PM +0200, Matthijs Mekking
wrote: Hi Frederico,
On 03/29/2018 08:45 PM, Frederico A C Neves wrote: I was
looking at our server to
Hi Frederico,
On 04-04-18 03:32, Frederico A C Neves wrote:
Hi Matthijs,
On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 02:37:12PM +0200, Matthijs Mekking wrote:
Hi Frederico,
On 03/29/2018 08:45 PM, Frederico A C Neves wrote:
I was looking at our server to evaluate the MIXFR implementation and
it seams to me that
On Apr 3, 2018, at 21:32, Frederico A C Neves wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 02:37:12PM +0200, Matthijs Mekking wrote:
>> Hi Frederico,
>>
>>> On 03/29/2018 08:45 PM, Frederico A C Neves wrote:
>>> I was looking at our server to evaluate the MIXFR implementation and
>>> it seams to me that th
Hi Matthijs,
On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 02:37:12PM +0200, Matthijs Mekking wrote:
> Hi Frederico,
>
> On 03/29/2018 08:45 PM, Frederico A C Neves wrote:
> > I was looking at our server to evaluate the MIXFR implementation and
> > it seams to me that the current text covering dnssec aware client
> >
On 03-04-18 15:22, Mark Andrews wrote:
-- Mark Andrews
On 3 Apr 2018, at 22:37, Matthijs Mekking
wrote:
Hi Frederico,
On 03/29/2018 08:45 PM, Frederico A C Neves wrote: I was looking
at our server to evaluate the MIXFR implementation and it seams
to me that the current text covering dnssec
--
Mark Andrews
> On 3 Apr 2018, at 22:37, Matthijs Mekking wrote:
>
> Hi Frederico,
>
>> On 03/29/2018 08:45 PM, Frederico A C Neves wrote:
>> I was looking at our server to evaluate the MIXFR implementation and
>> it seams to me that the current text covering dnssec aware client
>> logic d
Hi Frederico,
On 03/29/2018 08:45 PM, Frederico A C Neves wrote:
I was looking at our server to evaluate the MIXFR implementation and
it seams to me that the current text covering dnssec aware client
logic don't take in account that a posterior record at the addition
section, by an MIXFR DNSSEC
I was looking at our server to evaluate the MIXFR implementation and
it seams to me that the current text covering dnssec aware client
logic don't take in account that a posterior record at the addition
section, by an MIXFR DNSSEC aware server, will implicitly replace the
RRSIG RRset.
Logic could
10 matches
Mail list logo
