[66307] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Upcoming change to SOA values in .com and .net zones
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Scott Call)
Wed Jan 7 18:30:15 2004
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 15:29:38 -0800 (PST)
From: Scott Call <scall@devolution.com>
To: <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20040107231727.714B.RICHARD@mandarin.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004, Richard D G Cox wrote:
>
> On 7 Jan 2004 23:02 UTC Frank Louwers <frank@openminds.be> wrote:
>
> | stuid question
>
> Yup!
>
> | but isn't 2004010101 (today) > 1076370400 (9 Feb 2004)?
>
> Nope!
>
> >> The new format will be the UTC time at the moment of zone generation
> >> encoded as the number of seconds since the UNIX epoch.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> ... and not as YYYYMMDDHHMMSS or any contracted version thereof!
>
I think what Frank is asking is a valid question.
The way BIND/etc determine when a new zone file has been issued is by
seeing if it has a higher SN than the currently caches zone.
Frank's question is that when view simply as 10 digit integers (which is
how BIND uses them) 2004010801 is a larger integer than 1076370400.
This might cause problems with cached zones and other such staleness, so
it does seem a valid concern.
-Scott
---
Scott Call Router Geek, ATGi, home of $6.95 Prime Rib
I make the world a better place, I boycott Wal-Mart
