L-Root IPv6 address renumbering

Robert Edmonds edmonds at debian.org
Wed Mar 16 21:06:59 UTC 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

> 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

More information about the Unbound-users mailing list