BIND 9 AAAA record problems
Jim Reid
jim at rfc1035.com
Thu Jun 24 08:19:03 UTC 2004
>>>>> ">" == <wbwither at bobball.uchicago.edu> writes:
>> As for the two servers being on different networks, maybe that
>> will happen when it needs to. For the moment, all of my hosts
>> (mail, www, dns, etc.) are on the same network, so if DNS goes
>> out then probably *all* of my stuff is out, so it doesn't
>> matter IMHO.
It matters. And it matters now. Consider what will happen to the rest
of the internet, and more importantly your customers, if this net of
yours break. You really should read RFC2182. Here's what it has to say
about the subject:
3.3. A Myth Exploded
An argument is occasionally made that there is no need for the domain
name servers for a domain to be accessible if the hosts in the domain
are unreachable. This argument is fallacious.
+ Clients react differently to inability to resolve than inability
to connect, and reactions to the former are not always as
desirable.
+ If the zone is resolvable yet the particular name is not, then a
client can discard the transaction rather than retrying and
creating undesirable load on the network.
+ While positive DNS results are usually cached, the lack of a
result is not cached. Thus, unnecessary inability to resolve
creates an undesirable load on the net.
+ All names in the zone may not resolve to addresses within the
detached network. This becomes more likely over time. Thus a
basic assumption of the myth often becomes untrue.
More information about the bind-users
mailing list