Re: Primary vs. Secondary
fenton_at_discussions.microsoft.com
Date: 10/02/04
- Next message: Todd J Heron: "Re: DNS question"
- Previous message: Herb Martin: "Re: DNS question"
- In reply to: Kevin D. Goodknecht Sr. [MVP]: "Re: Primary vs. Secondary"
- Next in thread: Kevin D. Goodknecht Sr. [MVP]: "Re: Primary vs. Secondary"
- Reply: Kevin D. Goodknecht Sr. [MVP]: "Re: Primary vs. Secondary"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 02:11:03 -0700
Thanks Kevin,
So, in general, is adding a "not-as-reliable" nameserver
as an extra authoritative nameserver a good idea or a bad
idea? The reason why I ask is that my zone is now host
by 2 Zoneedit nameserver (which are reasonablly
reliable). But I am thinking using Public DNS's
nameservers too so that I will have a total of 4 auth
nameserver hosting my zone file. However, I have heard
that Public DNS's reliablity is not very good.. So, I am
wondering should I just leave it with 2, or should I add
in another not-as-reliable one.
Thanks again
Fenton
>-----Original Message-----
>In news:e$L4Ez$pEHA.556@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl,
>Fenton <fenton@no-email.com> commented
>Then Kevin replied below:
>> Thanks kevin,
>>
>> Just wondering since the DNS will randomly select the
all
>> Nameservers for query, (including the primary and all
the
>> secondarys), so, is putting an EXTRA "not-as-reliable"
>> secondary nameserver a good idea? On one hand, it
>> creates some extra redundancy. However, on the other
>> hand, there are chances for it to be picked randomly
>> while it is offline and hence delay the query.
>
>Do not confuse what I said, when you put a DNS on your
public record as
>authoritative then it should answer with authority. In
other words it needs
>a zone and an NS record for its name and IP.
>You could list as many DNS servers you want, up to the
maximum you can list
>with your registrar, if they don't have a zone and an NS
record they have no
>authority. If they are capable of doing recursive
lookups they will still
>answer without a zone for your domain, but not with
authority.
>Whether it is a primary or a secondary zone makes no
difference to the DNS
>server asking for the records, as long as it has
authority. The difference
>between a primary and a secondary is the secondary will
have a read only
>zone, but still have authority. The only DNS servers it
actually makes a
>difference to is the ones holding the zones, the DNS
server shown as the
>master is the one the secondary servers sync up to. Even
that doesn't mean
>that it is the one with a Primary zone. In fact, you
could make all of the
>DNS servers on the public record have secondary zones
and the one with the
>Primary zone may not even be publicly accessible. It
would be a hidden
>master and could be configured so that only the
secondary servers could
>access it to update their zones.
>
>
>
>--
>Best regards,
>Kevin D4 Dad Goodknecht Sr. [MVP]
>Hope This Helps
>===================================
>When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group"
>via your newsreader so that others may learn and
>benefit from your issue, to respond directly to
>me remove the nospam. from my email address.
>===================================
>http://www.lonestaramerica.com/
>===================================
>Use Outlook Express?... Get OE_Quotefix:
>It will strip signature out and more
>http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/
>===================================
>Keep a back up of your OE settings and folders
>with OEBackup:
>http://www.oehelp.com/OEBackup/Default.aspx
>===================================
>
>
>.
>
- Next message: Todd J Heron: "Re: DNS question"
- Previous message: Herb Martin: "Re: DNS question"
- In reply to: Kevin D. Goodknecht Sr. [MVP]: "Re: Primary vs. Secondary"
- Next in thread: Kevin D. Goodknecht Sr. [MVP]: "Re: Primary vs. Secondary"
- Reply: Kevin D. Goodknecht Sr. [MVP]: "Re: Primary vs. Secondary"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
