[cifs-protocol] Non-replication of record timestamps
douglas.bagnall at catalyst.net.nz
Wed Jun 16 04:56:36 UTC 2021
Another DNS scavenging question. In the article "How DNS Aging and
Scavenging Works" at
> If DNS aging and scavenging is not enabled on an AD-integrated DNS
> zone, there is no need to replicate DNS resource records’ timestamps.
> This is because this information is needed only for aging and
> scavenging mechanism and there is no requirement for this replication
> if it is not enabled. That is why, when DNS aging and scavenging is
> disabled on an AD-integrated DNS zone, the timestamps of resource
> records on your DC/DNS servers are not consistent (The resource
> record timestamp is updated on the DNS server that refreshed the
> record and not replicated to other DC/DNS servers).
> When DNS aging and scavenging is enabled on an AD-integrated DNS
> zone, the update of a resource record timestamp will start to be
> replicated to other DC/DNS servers. It is then important that the
> scavenging for the DNS zone is not done until you are sure that the
> update of your dynamic resource records was done and replicated. If
> not, you can see a bulk removal of DNS records that are legitimate
> and should not be removed.
My question is about how the non-replication of DNS timestamps when
aging is disabled works. Is it simply that the server does not update
uSNChanged for dns updates?
More information about the cifs-protocol