From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 22 04:26:43 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C86516A4CE for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 04:26:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from makeworld.com (makeworld.com [198.92.228.38]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C89D043D48 for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 04:26:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from racerx@makeworld.com) Received: from localhost (localhost.com [127.0.0.1]) by makeworld.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DB5160E2; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:26:42 -0600 (CST) Received: from makeworld.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (makeworld.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 26173-01; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:26:39 -0600 (CST) Received: from [198.92.228.34] (racerx.makeworld.com [198.92.228.34]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by makeworld.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF6FA60CD; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:26:38 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <41C8F794.2050309@makeworld.com> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:27:00 -0600 From: Chris User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20041218) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Frank Knobbe References: <20041222035615.GA10180@gamerasmog.com> <1103688155.7511.11.camel@server1> <1103688595.7511.17.camel@server1> <41C8F51D.9080604@makeworld.com> <1103689309.7511.23.camel@server1> In-Reply-To: <1103689309.7511.23.camel@server1> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by ClamAV 0.75.1/amavisd-new-2.2.0 (20041102) at makeworld.com - Isn't it ironic cc: RL cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Running own servers X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 04:26:43 -0000 Frank Knobbe wrote: > On Tue, 2004-12-21 at 22:16 -0600, Chris wrote: > >>>Or find someone with public name servers that is willing to pull zones >>>from your name server. Your domains then reference those 3rd party name >>>servers, but not your own. But since those 3rd party name servers pull >>>zones from your box, you are still in control of your zones as far as >>>configuration of zone information is concerned. > > >>I can't see how that will work. If an IP block say belongs to Verizon, >>THEY are authoritive. You just can't "steal" stuff and have it resolve >>both ways. > > > For reverse DNS, that is correct. You still won't be able to do reverse > DNS. However, forward DNS works just fine. > > I have a friend for example that administrates his own zone files for > the two domains he owns. My primary name server pulls that info from his > box, and my secondaries will pull it from my primary. His domains all > reference my name servers. That way the domains use stable name servers, > but he is still able to make changes (i.e. new CNAME and A records) > without my involvement. > > Again, this is only for forward resolution. Reverse resolution has > always to be delegated by the IP block owner to a stable name server > within that block. I'm not aware of any ISP who would delegate reverse > resolution to an address outside of their control. > > Cheers, > Frank Agreed - this will work for him. Along with DynDNS. In any event, he'll run into other issues if he runs a mail server (we won't get into that). The real answer here is this - have the user register a domain. have the ISP in question host it - then the ISP will do the reverse DNS for him. That's the easiest way I would think if the objective is reverse. If not - then it's moot. -- Best regards, Chris No matter how strong the breeze when you leave the dock once you have reached the furthest point from port the wind will die.