Maintained by: NLnet Labs

L-Root IPv6 address renumbering

Robert Edmonds
Wed Mar 16 22:06:59 CET 2016


Dave Warren via Unbound-users wrote:
> On 2016-03-16 10:46, Robert Edmonds via Unbound-users wrote:
> >Not quite, I want to avoid two things:
> >
> >1) The sysadmin should never have to update the root hints by hand.
> >"apt update && apt upgrade" should upgrade any packages needed to bring
> >the root hints up to date.
> >
> >2) The package maintainers shouldn't have to patch and rebuild each
> >package with compiled in root hints when a root server is renumbered.
> 
> At what point would a binary have a newer internal roots hints than the
> filesystem root.hints file when a user is using #1 to keep updated? Is there
> a subset of users who would update the binary but not apt update/upgrade?

This is a good point, it doesn't really matter for the distro user, I
guess.

> I guess to me, it seems better to directly address whatever failed to update
> the external root.hints than to add complexity of a "will-she won't-she" of
> using defined data files.
> 
> Also, does any of this matter? The root hints just used to find the root
> servers on initialization, and then the resolver retrieves and uses the
> current roots anyway. Resolvers need to update eventually, but it's not a
> networking-breaking level of urgency either, is it?

I agree, the consequences are extremely mild in the first place. We
still go to the trouble of backporting the root hint updates, though.

-- 
Robert Edmonds
edmonds at debian.org