Subject: draft-ietf-dnsext-axfr-clarify-04.txt

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 17:24:44 -0700

Andreas Gustafsson <[email-masked]> said (in private email, which
is why i quote here):

> the main technical motivation for outlawing the behavior of the old
> implementations is that it is fundametally incompatible with
> incremental zone transfers.  The RFC1995 IXFR protocol assumes a
> certain level of consistency in the data being transfered (as any
> incremental transfer protocol must); for example, that the zone
> data does not silently change without incrementing the zone serial
> number, and that the data sent by multiple masters showing the same
> serial number is the same.  If we allow AXFRs to mix in data from
> child zones, both of these basic assumptions will be violated.
> 
> Non-incremental zone transfers will interoperate whether or not we
> allow the old behavior, but IXFR will not interoperate (or even
> operate) reliably if it is allowed.

given the above, the chairs are inclined to declare consensus on
this draft.  last call was a while ago.  so if you have a contrary
technical argument, now would be a very good time to make it.

randy

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>