From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 2 00:38:46 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42CDA16A469; Thu, 2 Aug 2007 00:38:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from skip@menantico.com) Received: from vms048pub.verizon.net (vms048pub.verizon.net [206.46.252.48]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E39E13C48E; Thu, 2 Aug 2007 00:38:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from skip@menantico.com) Received: from mx.menantico.com ([71.168.196.161]) by vms048.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0JM4009KKF4GMBE6@vms048.mailsrvcs.net>; Wed, 01 Aug 2007 19:38:40 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2007 20:44:04 -0400 From: Skip Ford In-reply-to: <200708020013.l720DMH0095352@drugs.dv.isc.org> To: Mark Andrews Mail-followup-to: Mark Andrews , Doug Barton , FreeBSD Current , FreeBSD Stable Message-id: <20070802004404.GG59008@menantico.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-disposition: inline References: <46B11DB4.2020606@FreeBSD.org> <200708020013.l720DMH0095352@drugs.dv.isc.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: Doug Barton , FreeBSD Stable , FreeBSD Current Subject: Re: default dns config change causing major poolpah X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2007 00:38:46 -0000 Mark Andrews wrote: > > > I don't think that "all" of the drama could have been avoided in any > > case, there is too much emotion surrounding this issue. > > I'll concur with Doug on this. I've been discussing doing > just this for the last 10+ years. Why don't you update 2870 then to make it so? If all the roots provided it and were required to, there's no problem. But current best practice as defined by 2870 are for roots to only answer AXFRs from other roots. How can you advocate an OS pushing a configuration that isn't guaranteed to be functional? I understand the odds of it breaking, and I understand the benefits. That's not the issue. This is a configuration that should be guaranteed to work for 2 years after every OS release that includes it. -- Skip