IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Why new code/old keys? Re: [Ext] Re: sentinel and timing?

sthaug@nethelp.no Thu, 08 February 2018 17:31 UTC

Return-Path: <sthaug@nethelp.no>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DC0E12D7E3 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 09:31:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 19g0OK3Z6I_c for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 09:31:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bizet.nethelp.no (bizet.nethelp.no [195.1.209.33]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE158126D73 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 09:31:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (bizet.nethelp.no [IPv6:2001:8c0:9e04:500::1]) by bizet.nethelp.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F484E6074; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 18:31:03 +0100 (CET)
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2018 18:31:03 +0100
Message-Id: <20180208.183103.74655348.sthaug@nethelp.no>
To: paul@redbarn.org
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
From: sthaug@nethelp.no
In-Reply-To: <5A7C867C.8060803@redbarn.org>
References: <564E7616-6B47-48E2-B3DC-68A22032F441@icann.org> <20180208.152419.74654265.sthaug@nethelp.no> <5A7C867C.8060803@redbarn.org>
X-Mailer: Mew version 3.3 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/WODt4kEj47kN2rDxWSVOgV-Pn6U>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Why new code/old keys? Re: [Ext] Re: sentinel and timing?
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2018 17:31:09 -0000

> > Speaking only for myself - I have done many BIND upgrades without config
> > file changes (and I basically expect this to work).
> 
> i apologize, again, for the config file from last-bind8, not working in 
> all cases with first-bind9. i don't work at ISC any more, but i think i 
> can safely predict that this won't happen again.

Well now - BIND8 and BIND9 are rather different. However, I have
upgraded multiple times on BIND9 without any config change - it's
certainly possible I've been spoiled. I *did* get bitten recently
when, on a specific server with no IPv6 connectivity, I had to add

    listen-on-v6    { none; };

to get things running. But that's really my only complaint, and a
rather small one at that!

Steinar Haug, AS2116

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email