Leases on Dynamic Updates?

[Chris Buxton]

The proposal expired almost a year ago. Has it been updated, replaced,  
or ratified?

It's a good idea, similar to Microsoft's aging and scavenging routine.  
Optimally, it would be nice if Microsoft and the proposed standard  
could be brought into line; since MS has been doing this now for 8  
years or so, I think any proposal should use Microsoft's mechanism,  
assuming it's not too broken.

However, this is a discussion for a different forum. To answer your  
question, no, BIND does not support the expiring of RR's from  
authoritative data. (Unless I've missed something...)

Chris Buxton
Professional Services
Men & Mice
Address: Noatun 17, IS-105, Reykjavik, Iceland
Phone:   +354 412 1500
Email:   cbuxton at menandmice.com
www.menandmice.com

Men & Mice
We bring control and flexibility to network management

This e-mail and its attachments may contain confidential and  
privileged information only intended for the person or entity to which  
it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended  
recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination,  
distribution or copy of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you  
have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by  
reply e-mail and immediately delete this message and all its attachment.



On Jan 28, 2008, at 6:16 AM, dan at dcrdev.demon.co.uk wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> One of the drafts for Bonjour/Rendezvous (http://files.dns-sd.org/draft-sekar-dns-ul.txt 
> ) suggests an approach to applying leases to dynamic updates such  
> that they can be automatically deleted should the originating client  
> die.
>
> Does anyone know if BIND supports either the above or a similar  
> mechanism (e.g. http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/99jul/I-D/draft-ietf-dnsind-dddd-01.txt)?
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Dan.
>
>
>