Internal DNS server. Failure, when a client a) registers an IP b) deletes that IP c) registers again
abartlet at samba.org
Sat Jun 1 02:00:53 MDT 2013
On Sat, 2013-06-01 at 09:48 +0200, Michael Wood wrote:
> Hi Ricky and Kai
> On 1 June 2013 09:39, Kai Blin <kai at samba.org> wrote:
> > On 31/05/13 17:42, Michael Wood wrote:
> > Should "allow dns updates = yes" (or "true" or "1" or "on" or "enabled")
> >> be deprecated for 4.1? It seems like it's likely to be used by mistake
> >> otherwise when the user does not read the documentation properly or
> >> copies an smb.conf from someone's blog etc.
> > Yes and no. Let me elaborate on this a little.
> > Yes, because that setting should not be in smb.conf after all, but should
> > be read from the zone's flags like the Windows DNS server does.
> > No, because even on Windows it is possible to set up unsigned updates, so
> > I'm against killing that setting overall.
> You both misunderstood my proposal.
> I was proposing to get rid of the following (IMO misleading) options:
> allow dns updates = yes
> allow dns updates = true
> allow dns updates = 1
> allow dns updates = on
> allow dns updates = enabled
> I was NOT proposing to get rid of the following:
> allow dns updates = nonsecure and secure
> allow dns updates = nonsecure
> I hope that clarifies my proposal.
Sounds like a very good idea. I still think this applies:
> > Patches are welcome.
(and I would be very happy to give positive review to such a patch, if
Andrew Bartlett http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team http://samba.org
More information about the samba-technical