Stealth dns and SOA record

[Nicholas Lee]

"Barry Margolin" <barmar at bbnplanet.com> wrote in message
news:Vnmm4.27$mn5.368 at burlma1-snr2...

> If you're going to put something in the SOA record other than the
> unpublished primary, make sure it's not one of the published servers.  I'm

Sure given what people are telling me, unless you want dynamic updates to
works, it shouldn't matter what goes into the SOA as long as it resolves.

> not sure what you mean by the distinction between "published primary" and
> "published secondary" -- all the published servers are slaves, so none of
> them are primary.  Ignore the fact that Network Solutions's registration
> form still calls the first server "Primary" -- it's a meaningless
> distinction.

Semantics I guess.  Easier to say published primary than published domainz
(in my case) primary (PDP).  This is of course seperate from master or
slave.

Tell me, is there a issue with only the PDP slaving to the stealth server
while the PDSs remain slaved to the PDP?


> >So I'd be correct in saying that the SOA record is used only by: dynamic
> >updates, NOTIFYs and zone tranfers?
>
> The MinTTL field is used by caching servers as the negative cache time.
> And some lame delegation warning scripts use the point of contact as the
> destination for mail.

Actually one other thing I noticed about the SOA record is that, given the
master zone, if no MX record exists in the db.domain file and a nic.domain
point of contact (POC) record is used in both the db.domain and db."PTR"
files, then named (8.2.2P5) complains on the db."PTR" POC but not the
db.domain POC.


Nicholas