[GH-ISSUE #273] TTL for query results recursively resolved through CNAME (and SRV?) doesn't take CNAME (SRV?) TTL into account. #429

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-03-15 22:27:17 +03:00 by kerem · 1 comment

kerem commented

2026-03-15 22:27:17 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @briansmith on GitHub (Oct 27, 2017).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/hickory-dns/hickory-dns/issues/273

Originally created by @briansmith on GitHub (Oct 27, 2017). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/hickory-dns/hickory-dns/issues/273

kerem

2026-03-15 22:27:17 +03:00

closed this issue
added the
bug

crate:resolver
labels

kerem commented

2026-03-15 22:27:33 +03:00

Author

Owner

@briansmith commented on GitHub (Oct 27, 2017):

Consider "a CNAME b" with a 1ms TTL and "b A 1.2.3.4" with a 100 year TTL. A result for (a, 1.2.3.4) should have its result cached for no more than 1ms in case the CNAME changes. However, currently the CNAME's TTL is being ignored. Similarly, when there is a chain of CNAMEs, the CNAMEs earlier in the chain don't have their TTLs taken into account.

@briansmith commented on GitHub (Oct 27, 2017): Consider "a CNAME b" with a 1ms TTL and "b A 1.2.3.4" with a 100 year TTL. A result for (a, 1.2.3.4) should have its result cached for no more than 1ms in case the CNAME changes. However, currently the CNAME's TTL is being ignored. Similarly, when there is a chain of CNAMEs, the CNAMEs earlier in the chain don't have their TTLs taken into account.

kerem referenced this issue

2026-03-15 22:45:17 +03:00

[GH-ISSUE #429] Evaluate if ResolverFuture can be Sync #484

kerem referenced this issue

2026-03-15 22:47:25 +03:00

[GH-ISSUE #456] LookUp Future is not Sendable between threads #495