nanog mailing list archives

Re: Upcoming change to SOA values in .com and .net zones


From: "Philip J. Nesser II" <pjnesser () Nesser COM>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 16:08:01 -0800 (PST)


Go read RFC 1982.  They can do it that way without any real trouble as
long as all of the secondary (B-M) servers are tweaked.  Check out section
7 in particular.

--->  Phil

On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Frank Louwers wrote:


On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 11:17:58PM +0000, Richard D G Cox wrote:

| but isn't 2004010101 (today) > 1076370400 (9 Feb 2004)?

Nope!

The new format will be the UTC time at the moment of zone generation
encoded as the number of seconds since the UNIX epoch.
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

... and not as YYYYMMDDHHMMSS or any contracted version thereof!

Don't they use YYYYMMDDNN now? So today's version whould be 2004010801.
AFAIK, 1076370400 is actually "less" then 2004010801...

I know there are ways to "trick" nameservers in believing less is more,
but that requires at least 2 changes, and I don't know if that is
actually RFC-compliant behaviour...

Kind Regards,
Frank Louwers

--
Openminds bvba                www.openminds.be
Tweebruggenstraat 16  -  9000 Gent  -  Belgium



Current thread: