Fundamental problem with mandatory field zone-c
- Previous message (by thread): Fundamental problem with mandatory field zone-c
- Next message (by thread): Fundamental problem with mandatory field zone-c
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Havard Eidnes
Havard.Eidnes at runit.sintef.no
Fri Nov 26 22:29:46 CET 1993
> In the past (Blasco has mentioned this before) we said to include the > zone-c of the parent zone, since he/she maintains the MX records. > Sounds reasonable! > Not at all: by the same token one could argue that the person > maintaining a top level zone file should be registered as the > zone-c for every primary subdomain, since (s)he maintains the > NS records [in the top level zone file], just like in the case > of MX-only domains (s)he maintains the MX records [in the top > level zone file]. Well, this is an example of what I presently do with the few domains under "no" that are registered in the RIPE database (and which are of the "MX-only" variant): domain: fdata.no descr: Fellesdata A/S, Oslo admin-c: Geir Engebakken tech-c: Geir Engebakken zone-c: Uninett Hostmaster remarks: MX-only, maintained in "no" zone changed: Havard.Eidnes at runit.sintef.no 931124 source: RIPE > I've always just copied the admin-c into the zone-c in these > cases, for the simple reason that there is no such thing as a > zone for an MX-only domain and the admin contact can be held > equally well responsible for the MX records, even though (s)he > doesn't put/maintain them in the next higher zone file, as is > the case with NS records. Well, in case of DNS trouble (misconfiguration or similar lossage), the "zone-c" would in this case point in the wrong direction, no? Maybe the definition of "zone-c" should be refined to something like The zone contact for the zone where the authoritative data for the domain is registered. Note that in the case of a fully delegated domain, the NS records in the parent zone are actually not authoritative. > I would suggest to consider the presence of the *zc attribute > mandatory only if *ns attributes are present in the domain entry. Maybe worth discussing? (My initial reaction was "yes, this sounds great!", but after thinking about it for a while and reformulating the response to the previous paragraph, I'm not so sure anymore.) - Havard
- Previous message (by thread): Fundamental problem with mandatory field zone-c
- Next message (by thread): Fundamental problem with mandatory field zone-c
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]