This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[db-wg] Re: [dns-wg] Proposal to change the syntax of "nserver:" attribute
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] Re: [dns-wg] Proposal to change the syntax of "nserver:" attribute
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] Re: [dns-wg] Proposal to change the syntax of "nserver:" attribute
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Katie Petrusha
katie at ripe.net
Mon May 15 11:59:47 CEST 2006
On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 10:30:20AM +0200, Peter Koch wrote: Dear Peter, > > nserver: [domain_name] /or/ > > nserver: [domain_name] [ipv4_address] /or/ > > nserver: [domain_name] [ipv6_address] > > What's the reason not to use one line per server and list all v4 an/or v6 > addresses within that one line? 'One name per line' syntax seemed to be more clear and short... > > If [domain_name] is followed by an IP address, it must be inside the zone > > that is being delegated. Any level of a glue name is supported within the > > valid domain name syntax. > > <nitpick>s/inside the zone/inside the domain</nitpick>, since one might have > a name server even in a deeper zone. _Unless_ however this was meant as a > requirement, but then I can't understand the second sentence. The intention is to accept something like: domain: test.net nserver: ns1.test.net 168.0.0.1 nserver: ns2.d2.test.net ... etc (glue any level under <domain>, like a.b.c.x.y.z.test.net) and reject domain: test.net nserver: ns2.example.com 168.0.0.1 Hope it is clearer now; any suggestions about better and clearer phrasing are appreciated. > > domain: example.com > > nserver: ns1.test.net 168.0.0.1 > > nserver: ns1.test.net 0::0 > > nserver: ns1.example.com > > nserver: ns1.d1.example.com > > That should probably read 'domain: test.net' (or better s/test/example/). yes. > > Consequences for the delegation checks: > > > > DNS checks applicable to glue records will be added to the Zone Delegation > > Checker (http://www.ripe.net/rs/reverse/delcheck/delcheck_descr.html) > > Since I've not found the keyword glue on this page, could these checks be > circulated to the dns-wg in advance, please? All the DNS checks applicable to the 'normal' nameservers currently will be also applied to the glue nameservers. The only new glue-related checks will be: 1) Making sure all glue IPs listed in domain object are also listed in the zone at every nameserver 2) Glue name must be within the same domain (already listed above) Hopefully that makes it clear. After getting all the comments and corrections, I can resend the updated version of the proposal. -- Katie Petrusha RIPE NCC
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] Re: [dns-wg] Proposal to change the syntax of "nserver:" attribute
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] Re: [dns-wg] Proposal to change the syntax of "nserver:" attribute
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]