From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16190C2BB85 for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 10:16:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA258206B9 for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 10:16:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="jME7/jt1" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2441499AbgDPKQD (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Apr 2020 06:16:03 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([207.211.31.120]:38527 "EHLO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2441455AbgDPKP2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Apr 2020 06:15:28 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1587032127; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=duQdUsOOdHGiX8X+SSFFtnhQDtBYHM0gSY3ojiBRAto=; b=jME7/jt1K/4ELsgAoKvluDxwiHMLOcTB3G81EKkooBMBg7Uw/obiPuHXN37cOBjSvhfcM0 qX8x6Qvb49B5TK9HCAHlmMqkBK7E4ixfebeTfebYFpFyUozB8ZRiVy5DAcio9oRsGKYdvb zDwKvaDLvuJrlblJHXWb2PyV8TeacTs= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-341-lvRNdSpjMxOevcxPakXQlg-1; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 06:15:23 -0400 X-MC-Unique: lvRNdSpjMxOevcxPakXQlg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A21218C8C02; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 10:15:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from warthog.procyon.org.uk (ovpn-113-129.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.113.129]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7175E5C1D6; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 10:15:20 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903 From: David Howells In-Reply-To: References: <3865908.1586874010@warthog.procyon.org.uk> To: Steve French Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, Jeff Layton , linux-nfs , CIFS , linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org, Network Development , LKML , fweimer@redhat.com Subject: Re: What's a good default TTL for DNS keys in the kernel MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <127742.1587032119.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 11:15:19 +0100 Message-ID: <127743.1587032119@warthog.procyon.org.uk> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 Sender: linux-cifs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org Steve French wrote: > > 10 mins sounds like a reasonable default to me. > > I would lean toward slightly longer (20 minutes?) but aren't there > usually different timeouts for 'static' vs. 'dynamic' DNS records (so > static records would have longer timeouts)? Unfortunately, getaddrinfo() doesn't give me that information. David