SOA an NS records

[Barry Margolin]

In article <0.b9e70de7.25383e18 at aol.com>,  <S0LARlSTEK at aol.com> wrote:
>I have a zone that is just wanting to update to my secondary.  The only thing 

I don't understand your first sentence.  Does "just wanting to update" mean
"failing to update"?

>I can think of is that I have the exact same domain under and SOA record and 
>a NS record.

Have you checked the log on your primary server, to see if it's generating
warnings when it loads the zone?  The log should tell you precisely what it
doesn't like about the file.

>
>Like this:
>
>SOA ns1.websgt.net.
>
>NS      ns1.websgt.net.
>
>Can this cause a problem.  Or should the SOA be the machine name that the 
>actual site is on.

The only thing that cares about the hostname in an SOA record is dynamic
update.  The SOA hostname should be the name of the primary master DNS
server for the domain; at least 90% of the time it's also in the NS
records (the exception is "hidden primaries").

>Like this.
>
>SOA web60.websgt.net.
>NS      ns1.websgt.net.

Unless web60 is a DNS server, this is wrong.

Are these lines really the way they look in the zone file?  If they are,
the problem is that they're not indented, so "SOA" and "NS" are being taken
as hostnames, not record types.  The file should look something like:

@  SOA  ns1.websgt.net. hostmaster.websgt.net. (
        <other SOA parameters> )
   NS   ns1.websgt.net.
   NS   ns2.websgt.net.


-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar at bbnplanet.com
GTE Internetworking, Powered by BBN, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.