Re: [DNSOP] New Version Notification for draft-pusateri-dnsop-update-timeout-00.txt

[Ted Lemon <[e-mail]>]

On Sat, Aug 25, 2018 at 3:09 PM Tom Pusateri <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I think I already agreed with you here.
>
> My main point was that the primary needs a database and it already has one
> and probably doesn’t want another one. Because of the added benefit that
> Paul points out with promoting a secondary to primary after an extended
> outage, and the points that Joe makes about treating all records the same,
> it seems logical to store the lease lifetime information as actual resource
> records and transfer them to the secondary.
>
> FWIW, I think the database storage argument is actually the best argument
for this proposal: we need a way to represent  the data structure on disk,
and what we know how to store are RRs.
That said, I think that it's worth asking the question of what the right
format is, and not just assuming that it's a hash.  Why, for example, is a
hash better than just a copy of the data (when it's in flight)?   Suppose
that I store it in memory as just a timeout on the RR: in that case, what's
the easiest way for me to transfer the information?