Decimal serial numbers in Bind 9?

[phn at icke-reklam.ipsec.nu]

Simon Dodd <simon.dodd at joinkllc.com> wrote:
> I have a question, regarding decimal serial numbers.

> Albitz/Liu (Ed.4), pp151-152, states that while one CAN place a period
> in a serial number, BIND 4x interprets the serial number by treating the
> number trailing a period as a multiplier for the number before the
> period, then appends the original multiplier, leading to some weird
> issues (e.g. to BIND 4, 1.1 > 1.10). What neither the Albitz/Liu book,
> nor a quick web search, has made clear is whether BIND 9x reproduces
> this behaviour.=20

> The specification handed down to me is that we want to be using the
> format date.customer number.revision number, e.g. 20040721.6651.02. If
> BIND 9x behaves the same way as BIND 4 does in this regard (which is my
> principal question), then (and here's my comprehension check question)
> surely the proposed serial number convention couldn't possibly work,
> because BIND will multiply the numbers way above and beyond the 32-bit
> maximum (20040721.6651.02, for example, I'm thinking would become
> 11111000010001100000010111101101010110, which is 7 bits too long).

Won't work as expected. Decimal points in SOA version is depricated, use a 
continously increasing integer. In addition a string with several decimal 
points won't be interpreted as a number.

> Regards,
> Simon

> Regards,
> Simon Dodd,

> ------------------------
> "In Critical and baffling situations, it is always best to return to
> first principle and simple action" - Sir Winston Churchill


-- 
Peter Håkanson         
        IPSec  Sverige      ( At Gothenburg Riverside )
           Sorry about my e-mail address, but i'm trying to keep spam out,
	   remove "icke-reklam" if you feel for mailing me. Thanx.