[GH-ISSUE #88] implement updating of multiple hostnames in one update request #86

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-02-26 09:35:31 +03:00 by kerem · 4 comments

kerem commented

2026-02-26 09:35:31 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @ThomasWaldmann on GitHub (Nov 16, 2013).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/nsupdate-info/nsupdate.info/issues/88

is it useful?

Originally created by @ThomasWaldmann on GitHub (Nov 16, 2013). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/nsupdate-info/nsupdate.info/issues/88 is it useful?

kerem

2026-02-26 09:35:31 +03:00

closed this issue
added the
wontfix
label

kerem commented

2026-02-26 09:35:32 +03:00

Author

Owner

@ThomasWaldmann commented on GitHub (Nov 21, 2013):

one use case might be e.g. web name-based virtualhosts (e.g. to test or even run multiple web sites).

@ThomasWaldmann commented on GitHub (Nov 21, 2013): one use case might be e.g. web name-based virtualhosts (e.g. to test or even run multiple web sites).

kerem commented

2026-02-26 09:35:32 +03:00

Author

Owner

@ThomasWaldmann commented on GitHub (Nov 21, 2013):

note: try to only send only ONE update (including all the needed changes for all hostnames) to the dns server.

@ThomasWaldmann commented on GitHub (Nov 21, 2013): note: try to only send only ONE update (including all the needed changes for all hostnames) to the dns server.

kerem commented

2026-02-26 09:35:32 +03:00

Author

Owner

@ThomasWaldmann commented on GitHub (Nov 22, 2013):

hmm, we have a random (and thus unique) per-host secret currently.

as it will only do http auth once for updating multiple hosts, we need one "main" host (that determines authentication) and some means of associating other hosts with that main host, so the service knows it is acceptable to update them together at once.

security note: just belonging to same user is not good enough (just think of some admin managing multiple customers... - you don't want to allow the router of one customer to be able to update other customer's hosts, just because they are all managed by same admin).

for associated hosts, there must be no own update secret.

@ThomasWaldmann commented on GitHub (Nov 22, 2013): hmm, we have a random (and thus unique) per-host secret currently. as it will only do http auth once for updating multiple hosts, we need one "main" host (that determines authentication) and some means of associating other hosts with that main host, so the service knows it is acceptable to update them together at once. security note: just belonging to same user is not good enough (just think of some admin managing multiple customers... - you don't want to allow the router of one customer to be able to update other customer's hosts, just because they are all managed by same admin). for associated hosts, there must be no own update secret.

kerem commented

2026-02-26 09:35:32 +03:00

Author

Owner

@ThomasWaldmann commented on GitHub (Nov 24, 2013):

hmm, somehow this is rather an anti-feature:

it makes stuff quite more complex (see above).

why not just send multiple individual updates for each hostname (as we also do separate updates for v4 and v6)?

@ThomasWaldmann commented on GitHub (Nov 24, 2013): hmm, somehow this is rather an anti-feature: it makes stuff quite more complex (see above). why not just send multiple individual updates for each hostname (as we also do separate updates for v4 and v6)?

kerem referenced this issue

2026-02-26 10:31:41 +03:00

[PR #385] [MERGED] Config help #483