"bad cache-hit" or "bad-cache hit"

[Mark Andrews]

It a hold down cache on bad lookups. The timeout is 10 minutes.  To prove whether a zone is secure or not DS records at delegations in the chain are looked up. Sometimes that fails. This cache records that failure. 

-- 
Mark Andrews

> On 17 Apr 2024, at 07:03, John Thurston <john.thurston at alaska.gov> wrote:
> 
> 
> Looking in my logs today, I found a confusing line:
> 
>     validating cran.rproject.org/SOA: bad cache hit (rproject.org/DS)
> 
> I was trying to figure out what was wrong with my cache, and how BIND might be able to determine that a cache hit is bad. To do that, it would need to retrieve the current value and compare it to the value in cache . . and by the time it has done that, why has it bothered to consult the cache?
> 
> But now I think I may have mis-parsed the line. Maybe it isn't:
> 
>     bad cache-hit (i.e. Something was wrong with the cached value)
> 
> but is instead:
> 
>     bad-cache hit (i.e. We found what we wanted in the cache of bad entries)
> 
> Can anyone confirm my hypothesis?
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> --
> Do things because you should, not just because you can. 
> 
> John Thurston    907-465-8591
> John.Thurston at alaska.gov
> Department of Administration
> State of Alaska
> -- 
> Visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list
> 
> ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions. Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.
> 
> 
> bind-users mailing list
> bind-users at lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/attachments/20240417/1c685f69/attachment.htm>