lpzIauqUk02YFikPgXuLI7a7Fj1bsh6D/mxWSdcq7SwJgnNVLo1jnMWMUQ
Yd5lBVTsw+zb5sSHwagUGVTjxb5+aY4112/EBL8N7H+o0OiEK1jGHstexBHSmFYHFDLE
OlE2IMPImKChfyjiBwz7+XUfg/PIsNJvEio1o=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.182.45.102 with SMTP id l6mr22697212obm.0.1327860844988; Sun,
29 Jan 2012 10:14:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.182.11.70 with HTTP; Sun, 29 Jan 2012 10:14:04 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20120129174553.GN23380@???>
References: <20120129152937.GU32046@???>
<CAMe3QpNockhJfp5oYVTjEuF8bxhkZOgqAig-xOebUoc-k8u58w@???>
<20120129174148.GM23380@???>
<20120129174553.GN23380@???>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 18:14:04 +0000
Message-ID: <CAMe3QpNcDf5h_MBf67a+Vi_vKOQ9ngbN_kty5rAxavZYcyguMQ@???>
From: Keith Williams <keithwilliamsnp@???>
To: users@???
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0444ef0bfa090804b7aeb1a2
X-Virus-Scanner: Scanned by ClamAV on mail.bitfolk.com at Sun,
29 Jan 2012 18:14:12 +0000
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.214.176
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: keithwilliamsnp@???
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
spamd1.lon.bitfolk.com
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.6 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,
DKIM_VALID_AU, HTML_MESSAGE, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,
SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Report: * -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
low * trust
* [209.85.214.176 listed in list.dnswl.org]
* -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
* 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
* -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's * domain
* -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
* 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily
* valid
* 2.5 MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY MIME character set indicates foreign
language
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:14:11 +0000)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail.bitfolk.com)
Subject: Re: [bitfolk] DNS refresh and expire values, alerting
X-BeenThere: users@???
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11
Precedence: list
List-Id: Users of BitFolk hosting <users.lists.bitfolk.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bitfolk.com/mailman/options/users>,
<mailto:users-request@lists.bitfolk.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.bitfolk.com/lurker/list/users.html>
List-Post: <mailto:users@lists.bitfolk.com>
List-Help: <mailto:users-request@lists.bitfolk.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bitfolk.com/mailman/listinfo/users>,
<mailto:users-request@lists.bitfolk.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 18:14:13 -0000
--f46d0444ef0bfa090804b7aeb1a2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=TIS-620
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Andy
Yes you are right about the notify. I was trying to think things through. I
am using BIND but may be some of the non mainstream servers may not work
correctly in that way. I don't know, but as you say that is beside the
point.
Yes I would suggest that alerts are not sent in such a case.
On 29 January 2012 17:45, Andy Smith <andy@???> wrote:
> Hi Keith,
>
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 05:41:48PM +0000, Andy Smith wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 05:14:12PM +0000, Keith Williams wrote:
> > > I think your suggestion is a good one but would it be possible to
> write the
> > > code so that if refresh or expire time is below a certain amount, or
> the
> > > difference between them is less than a certain figure/proportion then
> the
> > > alerts are switched off for that domain and a warning given on the
> panel
> > > page. It's then up to the customer to keep an eye on it.
> >
> > Even though alerts can still be disabled right now without asking
> > support, you would still recommend that no alerts are sent in this
> > case?
>
> You are not alone in this btw; another off-list response suggested
> having the web site warn that the refresh/expire times are unwise
> and that alerting will therefore be disabled because of that. Then
> allow to turn back on if desired.
>
> Cheers,
> Andy
>
> --
> http://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARED
