I agree. I follow the same policy, that the mailhost always has direct, fast
access to a caching nameserver, so I'd prefer Exim never directly cache DNS
lookup results at all.
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Welty <rwelty@???>
To: exim-users@??? <exim-users@???>
Date: Wednesday, August 05, 1998 10:11 AM
Subject: Re: [EXIM] Possible bug in hosts_lookup_nets ?
>At 11:54 AM 8/5/98 -0400, you wrote:
>>On Wed, Aug 05, 1998 at 10:34:00AM +0100, Philip Hazel wrote:
>>> How often is occasionally? I don't myself think this is a major issue,
>>> but others may wish to argue otherwise.
>
>>It may be overly complex but why not use the Time-To-Live value associated
>>with the address in the DNS? After the TTL expires, an address is not
>>guaranteed to be valid anyway, so that would be a good time to reload.
>
>yes!
>
>while TTLs are often up in the 24 hour range, when i transition a domain
>name to a new ip address, i start shortening the TTLs a day in advance -- i
>cut it to one hour, then, 24 hours later, i cut it to a small number (say 5
>minutes), and then an hour after that, i can think about a reasonably clean
>transition to the new IP.
>
>in other words, TTLs do get manipulated intentionally for good reason.
>
>but here's another issue: i always run a caching name server on any
>mailhost that sees serious service. since it already implements all the
>caching mechanisms per RFC, perhaps there should be an option:
>
>ip_cache = no
>ip_cache = yes
>
>richard
>
>
>richard
>
>--
>Richard Welty
>NeWorks Networking, Inc. 518-244-9675
>rwelty@??? http://www.neworks.net/
>
>
>--
>*** Exim information can be found at http://www.exim.org/ ***
>
>
--
*** Exim information can be found at
http://www.exim.org/ ***
