To:
"'ietf-provreg@cafax.se'" <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>
From:
"Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
Date:
Sat, 2 Nov 2002 20:08:13 -0500
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject:
RE: Handling of External Host Objects
One of the reasons I think that this external host thing continues to be an issue is because it's a kludge. I firmly believe that the only objects that should exist in a repository are objects for which the repository is authoritative. Other needed data should exist as attributes of existing objects. I suggested this concept related to external hosts back when the topic first came up. Some folks had issues with it, but I'll suggest it again as an alternative. In a nutshell: - The only objects that should exist in a repository are objects for which the repository is authoritative. - Host objects should only be created in a repository that is authoritative for the host. In the case of hosts as name servers, "authoritative" means that data in the repository (host name and address(es)) is used to publish DNS glue and the repository is the legitimate source for that data. - If an external host is needed for delegation purposes, it can be associated with a domain object as an attribute of the object with no host object needed in advance. There's no need to create an external host object ahead of time, no need to worry about IP addresses, etc. This solution does not allow object-based management of external hosts, which means that renaming the external host would need to be done on a per-name basis. It may address the other issues that people have talked about on this thread, though. I know this means that a domain can be associated with hosts as objects and host as attributes and some people think that's inconsistent. I don't think it is if you agree with the first point above. -Scott-