From: Wlodek Wencel Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 14:41:59 +0000 (+0100) Subject: [v1_0_0] differences.txt file removed X-Git-Tag: trac4231_base~2 X-Git-Url: http://git.ipfire.org/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=5d62a8b7102baba2635e6cc4dbdd849084a64a33;p=thirdparty%2Fkea.git [v1_0_0] differences.txt file removed --- diff --git a/doc/Makefile.am b/doc/Makefile.am index dd0074430f..dc9a389157 100644 --- a/doc/Makefile.am +++ b/doc/Makefile.am @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ SUBDIRS = guide design -EXTRA_DIST = version.ent.in differences.txt Doxyfile Doxyfile-xml +EXTRA_DIST = version.ent.in Doxyfile Doxyfile-xml EXTRA_DIST += devel/config-backend.dox EXTRA_DIST += devel/contribute.dox EXTRA_DIST += devel/mainpage.dox diff --git a/doc/differences.txt b/doc/differences.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 41cf3cd98c..0000000000 --- a/doc/differences.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,42 +0,0 @@ -Differences of Bind 10 to other software -======================================== - -BIND 9 ------- - -TODO: There are definitely more differences than just this. - -DNS zone transfer: -* When an incoming zone transfer fails, for example because the - received zone doesn't contain a NS record, bind 9 stops serving the - zone and returns SERVFAIL to queries for that zone. Bind 10 still - uses the previous version of zone. - -RDATA implementations: -* IN/A: BIND 10 does not accept abbreviated forms of textual IPv4 - addresses for class-IN, type-A RDATA. BIND 9 warns about it but - still accepts it as the standard inet_aton() function. Such forms - should actually be NOT accepted per RFC 1035, but BIND 9 accepts them - probably because of compatibility reasons. Until our strict - (and more correct) behavior causes operations issues, we'll keep it. - -DNS data sources: -* In-memory data source does not sort RDATA of each RRset (in the - DNSSEC order) while BIND 9 normally sorts them internally. The main - purpose of the BIND 9's behavior is to make the ordering - predictable, but if the RDATA are rotated in DNS responses (which - BIND 9 also does by default) the predictability wouldn't be that - useful for the clients. So we skip the sorting in the BIND 10 - implementation to simplify the implementation (and possibly make it - a bit more efficient). - -* If different RRs of the same RRset and their RRSIGs have different - TTL when loaded to the in-memory data source, the lowest TTL among - all RRs (whether it's the covered RRset or RRSIGs) will be used. - BIND 9 shows some inconsistent policy on this point for unknown - reason (sometimes the TTL of the first RR is used, sometimes the - latest one is used). We differ here firstly for consistency, and - because it seems to be more compliant to the sense of RFC2181. - In any case, the administrator should make the TTLs same, especially - if the zone is signed, as described in RFC4034 (and, that will be - normally ensured by zone signing tools).