Tinc 2.0

[Rob Townley]

On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 1:54 PM, David Nicol <davidnicol at gmail.com> wrote:
> the keys are too big for .txt records?
>
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Rob Townley <rob.townley at gmail.com> wrote:
>> But it is difficult to replicate the public host file to  each
>> machine.  That is why I would welcome a modified myDns or modified
>> djbdns that holds the public key for each dynamically updated
>> hostname.  Hamachi must use a special DNS server to accomplish this.
> - Show quoted text -
> _______________________________________________
> tinc mailing list
> tinc at tinc-vpn.org
> http://www.tinc-vpn.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinc
>

Have not had much experience with txt record actual vs theoretical
restrictions, but would think text records could work fine.  Section
6.1 and 6.3 of the DNS Service Discovery draft below recommend no more
than 300 bytes even though the previous paragraph says a txt record
can be 65535 bytes - probably for performance reasons.  The length of
the txt record has to be maintained and sent as well.   DNS Extensions
may work or TSIG and other DNSSEC means.  But all of us can think in
terms of db columns and leveraging myDNS / mySQL replication..

http://files.dns-sd.org/draft-cheshire-dnsext-dns-sd.txt