Re: Stub Zone or Conditional Fowarding?
- From: "Jorge Silva" <jorgesilva_pt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2006 12:49:31 +0100
and T1 traffic will decrease significantly*Little clarification about this: I'm assuming lots of changes on the
Primary zone, which isn't very common... Remember DNS will cache for a
period of time all recent maded queries for that Zone and DNS traffic will
normally be reduced, but again I only say that because you said that you had
lots of DNS traffic in your T1 link.
--
I hope that the information above helps you
Good Luck
Jorge Silva
MCSA
Systems Administrator
"Jorge Silva" <jorgesilva_pt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:OLxhaz0zGHA.576@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi
If I understand you correctly your main concern is T1 activity, correct?
Fastest way to resolve is = Secondary Zones - Why? Resolve all queries
locally and your T1 is only used for delta updates (only changes are
replicated).
Forwarding = You have better control of which servers does your Server
contact for queries resolution. (Needs Active link)
Stub Zones = The big advantage of Stub Zones is that updates NS records
automatically, so if new DNS servers are added, your DNS server you'll
know about that. (Needs Active Link)
IMO: I f your primary concern is link activity, you should use secondary
zones, by using Secondary zones all queries will be resolved locally, and
T1 traffic will decrease significantly
take a look at
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;811118
- Let me known what do you think
- Wait for other opinions.
--
I hope that the information above helps you
Good Luck
Jorge Silva
MCSA
Systems Administrator
"Phil S." <nospam-m-phil-NoSpam@one two three m-a-p-s.net> wrote in
message news:ur8tYXqzGHA.4796@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Goggled and searched this NG for answer, but still need help. (Jorge
reply on similar question on August 2, 2006 had good links)
MyCompany.com and OtherCompany.com are linked DMZ to DMZ via by dedicated
T1. OtherCompany.com has set up a special DNS server for MyCompany (and
other vendors) to use in their DMZ. This DMZ name server then links to
application servers at OtherCompany inside 2nd FW. Vendors can only
reach specific application servers / web sites.
I need to reduce the DNS queries to a minimum across the T1. Application
my users have was written such that a lot of DNS queries are used for
each application database update, refresh, or whatever. T1 traffic is
very high.
My question: which method, Stub Zone or Conditional Forwarding, will
result in the least amount of DNS queries across T1 link? Plus which
method can have the my local DNS server(s) hold a cache of DNS resolution
for a TTL of 12 hours or more? (refresh only during after hours.)
I hope I have asked my question correctly, I may have added too much
details, but trust me - the actual case is a lot more complex that this.
Phil
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Stub Zone or Conditional Fowarding?
- From: Phil S.
- Re: Stub Zone or Conditional Fowarding?
- References:
- Stub Zone or Conditional Fowarding?
- From: Phil S.
- Re: Stub Zone or Conditional Fowarding?
- From: Jorge Silva
- Stub Zone or Conditional Fowarding?
- Prev by Date: Re: Stub Zone or Conditional Fowarding?
- Next by Date: Re: Stub Zone or Conditional Fowarding?
- Previous by thread: Re: Stub Zone or Conditional Fowarding?
- Next by thread: Re: Stub Zone or Conditional Fowarding?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
