Re: OT: secondary dns

2002-01-11 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach Jacob Elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.11.1933 +0100]: > > however, this being an extra administrative burden, and me currently in > > the process of moving to another registrar, i started questioning the > > point of the additional two. assume the main server as well as it's mail > >

Re: OT: secondary dns

2002-01-11 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach Jacob Elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.11.1933 +0100]: > > however, this being an extra administrative burden, and me currently in > > the process of moving to another registrar, i started questioning the > > point of the additional two. assume the main server as well as it's mail >

Re: OT: secondary dns

2002-01-11 Thread Peter Billson
Stability of the Web in general. A domain should resolve regardless if it is reachable. Pete -- http://www.elbnet.com ELB Internet Services, Inc. Web Design, Computer Consulting, Internet Hosting > i guess negative TTL, but is there > another reason? after all, what use is it to me to be able t

Re: OT: secondary dns

2002-01-11 Thread Jacob Elder
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 07:29:51PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: > however, this being an extra administrative burden, and me currently in > the process of moving to another registrar, i started questioning the > point of the additional two. assume the main server as well as it's mail > backup (the

OT: secondary dns

2002-01-11 Thread martin f krafft
a general question: so i have this server handling some domains as primary DNS, as well as being their web- and mailserver. another domain does slaving and secondary MX, but because i don't want load-balancing on DNS RR basis for webservices, and because HTTP can't deal with secondary servers, webp

Re: OT: secondary dns

2002-01-11 Thread Peter Billson
Stability of the Web in general. A domain should resolve regardless if it is reachable. Pete -- http://www.elbnet.com ELB Internet Services, Inc. Web Design, Computer Consulting, Internet Hosting > i guess negative TTL, but is there > another reason? after all, what use is it to me to be able

Re: OT: secondary dns

2002-01-11 Thread Jacob Elder
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 07:29:51PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: > however, this being an extra administrative burden, and me currently in > the process of moving to another registrar, i started questioning the > point of the additional two. assume the main server as well as it's mail > backup (th

OT: secondary dns

2002-01-11 Thread martin f krafft
a general question: so i have this server handling some domains as primary DNS, as well as being their web- and mailserver. another domain does slaving and secondary MX, but because i don't want load-balancing on DNS RR basis for webservices, and because HTTP can't deal with secondary servers, web