Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 27 Jun 2003 07:34:49 +0100
From:      Jez Hancock <jez.hancock@munk.nu>
To:        freebsd-questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Two DNS servers with one IP address
Message-ID:  <20030627063449.GA9527@users.munk.nu>
In-Reply-To: <00e801c33c07$3e920360$0100a8c0@ibacsoft.dynu.com>
References:  <00c101c3353c$4ecbe100$0100a8c0@ibacsoft.dynu.com> <20030626080930.GA24416@kyblik.pieskovisko.sk> <3EFAAE2C.1000509@attbi.com> <00e801c33c07$3e920360$0100a8c0@ibacsoft.dynu.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 12:20:30PM -0500, Alfonso Romero wrote:
> Thanks for your reply. The reason I wanted to have two DNS servers is
> because I want to register several domains and don?t want to depend on an
> external DNS service, but I found out the two DNS servers required by
> Internic must be physically separated also, so I?ll have to ask someone else
> to host my secondary DNS server, or stick with the available DNS options. I
> just wondered if it could be possible to have two DNS servers inside a LAN,
> behind a FreeBSD box with NAT.
This item on devshed is relevant to this thread:
http://forums.devshed.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=50100

Can anyone confirm that it's no longer a requisite to provide 2
distinct DNS servers for a domain you register?  I say no longer
because as I understand it there was a time when 2 distinct nameservers
were required...

Also, in the case an admin has only one auth nameserver for a domain but
a registrar _requires_ you list two, what is the best strategy for
listing the second nameserver? Is there any way to avoid using a third
party DNS provider as your secondary nameserver (providing some sort of
dummy listing)?

As mentioned above in thread there are no doubt many cases where all services are
hosted on one single IP address and so if the server goes down, losing
DNS is the least of your worries.  In this case wouldn't having a second
nameserver listed actually be a bad thing (since queries to that second NS waste
some (ok, minimal, but still some) bandwidth)?

Cheers,
Jez



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030627063449.GA9527>