NSI policy on lame delagations

Sun Nov 22 01:18:27 UTC 1998

On Sat, 21 Nov 1998, Steven J. Sobol wrote:

> > On the other hand, maybe there is another solution. Don't put all your
> > eggs in one basket. Run at least two nameservers.
> 
> This is a no-brainer.
> 
> 1. If you're running only a primary and no secondaries, your DNS is an
> accident waiting to happen.

Guess I should have said "run at least two sets of nameservers, i.e. two
primaries and two secondaries. One set for recent additions... etc.".

> If you ARE running at least one secondary, it can pick up the slack while
> the primary is relaoding.

Actually, I prefer an architecture in which the publicly accessible
nameservers are all secondaries from a private primary nameserver. In
other words, using BIND 4 terminology, the two nameservers registered with
the Internic have only "secondary" records in their named.boot files and
the nameserver with "primary" records is not used for anything except
feeding these "secondary" nameservers. In BIND 8 this terminology changed
to "master" and "slave", probably to avoid confusion with the fact that
people tend to call the first nameserver in the list registered with the
Internic, the "primary" nameserver but this does not mean that it has to
be "primary" or "master" in the named config file.

--
Michael Dillon                 -               E-mail: michael at memra.com
Check the website for my Internet World articles -  http://www.memra.com        