secondary vs caching

[Michael Voight]

In theory, all servers are caching servers. :)
In addition to this, they might also be primary or secondary for a
domain. 
By making it secondary, you reduce the query time for the client that
want to resolve addresses or hostnames in the domains you are
authoritative for.

After the initial query for a specific client, you really don't get a
faster response time from a secondary than you would for a caching
server. However, secondary servers can receive updates to the zone as
soon as the primary is updated (see NOTIFY). This would not happen on a
server that cached the record. It would have to wait for the TTL to be
reached.

Additionally, it is important to have secondary servers, in case the
primary is down.

Michael Voight
CSE

Becki Kain wrote:
> 
> I understand what they both are in theory, as servers, I don't understand
> the reason
> to use the use a caching server over a secondary though.  Can someone lend
> an idea on this?
> 
> thanks in advance
> 
> Becki Kain
> beckers at furph.com
> --
>   furph, Inc.   WWW/Unix/Windows Solutions      734-513-7763 (voice)
> info at furph.com     http://www.furph.com         734-513-7759 (FAX)