[dns-wg] Updating RIPE 203
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] Updating RIPE 203
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] Updating RIPE 203
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Paul Hoffman
paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Fri Aug 11 19:09:21 CEST 2017
On 11 Aug 2017, at 9:41, Havard Eidnes wrote: >> Dropping the retry value down further seems reasonable, maybe to 5 >> minutes. You always want your secondaries to have fresh data. > > While I agree with the latter, I don't agree that's the preferred > way to do this. DNS Notify usually accomplishes the goal of > keeping your slaves to have up-to-date data. From RFC 1035: RETRY A 32 bit time interval that should elapse before a failed refresh should be retried. My reading of this is that if a secondary is doing a refresh (either based on a timer or on a Notify) and it fails, it should try again in that many seconds. If so, you would still want a short retry value. Is that how others see the value? --Paul Hoffman
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] Updating RIPE 203
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] Updating RIPE 203
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]