Chris Buxton wrote:
On Jan 14, 2010, at 5:04 PM, Peter Laws wrote:
And I right in thinking that, on a slave, I can have multiple masters
designated for a particular zone? I just have to make sure that the slave that
is pretending to be the master allows transfers, right?
Don't forget about
On Jan 15, 2010, at 10:17 AM, Peter Laws wrote:
> Chris Buxton wrote:
>> On Jan 14, 2010, at 5:04 PM, Peter Laws wrote:
>>> And I right in thinking that, on a slave, I can have multiple masters
>>> designated for a particular zone? I just have to make sure that the slave
>>> that is pretending t
Chris Buxton wrote:
Every slave server needs the following from its masters (whether that's the
primary master and/or one or more slaves):
- zone transfer access
- notifications of zone updates
OK.
Unless you put in some special and usually unnecessary (and useless)
configuration, the no
When the DNS was designed, one primary assumption was that name/address
mappings changed *infrequently*. Hence caching was integrated into the
protocol, and is absolutely necessary for any kind of reasonable DNS
performance.
If you twist DNS to perform load-balancing and/or failover functions,
I recently had an odd occurrence with my DNS servers. I have two
servers that act as caching resolvers for a community college and
authoritative for the college's domain. A few days ago they both
stopped working for about 15 minutes. The only clue I've been able
to find is my logs contain an unu
5 matches
Mail list logo
