[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Bind 9 AXFR Modification vs AXFR Clarification

To: Dean Anderson <dean@av8.com>
Subject: Re: Bind 9 AXFR Modification vs AXFR Clarification
From: gson@nominum.com (Andreas Gustafsson)
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 18:51:58 -0800 (PST)
Cc: Mark.Andrews@isc.org, Namedroppers <namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>, <iesg@ietf.org>
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0302182015150.1529-100000@commander.av8.net>
References: <200302190054.h1J0sU4U003065@drugs.dv.isc.org><Pine.LNX.4.44.0302182015150.1529-100000@commander.av8.net>

Dean Anderson writes:
> Zone definition and content is not an AXFR issue.  Server administrators
> provide the definition of zone boundaries. (RFC 1034 Section 2.3 and
> elsewhere)  AXFR merely gives the contents of the zone as has been defined
> according to the boundaries and content specified by the administrator.

This is exactly what the draft says, so what are you disagreeing with?

The issue with BIND 8 is that it does *not* give the contents of the
zone according to the boundaries and content specified by the zone
administrator, but instead a mixture of data from different zones as
specified by their different administrators.
-- 
Andreas Gustafsson, gson@nominum.com

References:
- Re: Bind 9 AXFR Modification vs AXFR Clarification
  - From: Mark.Andrews@isc.org

Prev by Date: measuring success
Next by Date: Re: Bind 9 AXFR Modification vs AXFR Clarification
Previous by thread: Re: Bind 9 AXFR Modification vs AXFR Clarification
Next by thread: Re: Bind 9 AXFR Modification vs AXFR Clarification
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread