Is this zonefile legal or should it be changed?

[Roy Arends]

On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Eivind Olsen wrote:

> Hello.
> 
> I'm looking at a zonefile here that looks a bit odd to me, but perhaps 
> it's not a problem at all?
> 
> This is used in BIND 8.2.3:
> 
> -START-
> $ORIGIN 2.120.10.in-addr.arpa.
> @	1D IN SOA	@ root (
> 			42	; serial
> 			3H	; refresh
> 			15M	; retry
> 			1W	; expiry
> 			1D )	; minimum
> ;
> 	1D IN NS @
> ;
> 1	1D IN PTR server1.some.hidden.domain.
> 2	1D IN PTR server2.some.hidden.domain.
> -STOP-
> 
> The things I find odd is the use of "3H" and "15M" etc. for the 
> different times in the SOA-field and the RRs. I thought I read someplace 
> that the H/M/W/D notation was deprecated or incorrect?

To my knowledge, this is not deprecated nor incorrect.

> And also - shouldn't the SOA have specified some nameserver and some 
> email-address? In this zonefile it only says "...IN SOA @ root".

It has. Using the @ character, causes bind to use the name specified in
the $ORIGIN directive. The root name in the soa is not terminated with a
dot, so bind will automaticly attach the $ORIGIN after root.

To the outside world, this SOA record will be:

2.120.10.in-addr.arpa. 86400 IN SOA \
      2.120.10.in-addr.arpa. root.2.120.10.in-addr.arpa. (
                       42      ; serial
                       10800   ; refresh
                       900     ; retry  
                       604800  ; expiry 
                       86400 ) ; minimum

> Am I correct in thinking that those issues are wrong, or are they legal 
> to use?

They are legal to use.

Regards,

Roy Arends
Nominum