using slave on un-published network??

[Kevin Darcy]

simmen wrote:

> hello all..
> (hope u guys r all ok)
> i have 3 questins...
> 1.. what effect it will have on the DNS/primary if the secoundry is on an unpublished network....??

Is it a *registered* slave or an unregistered one? If it's unregistered, then it shouldn't have any effect on the master at all (assuming there is connectivity between master and slave).

If it's a *registered* slave, and no-one on the Internet can get to it because it's on an unpublished network, then, since DNS load-balances between nameservers, it means the other nameservers -- including perhaps the master -- will get all of the
queries that would normally have gone to that slave spread amongst them. It will also slow down name resolution somewhat and potentially annoy people.

Maybe you should use split DNS instead.

> 2.. i am a bit confused about a thing...i.e
> lets suppose i have multiple zones..(as masters)
> lets say 1 is abc.net..and the other is xyz.net
> my NS's r configured as nsp.abc.net//(P) and nss.abc.net//(S) in abc.net.
> Now in the zone file of xyz.net i configure the NS record as
> nsp.abc.net.&.nss.abc.net..(naturally)...but i dont give the A records for the nsp.abc.net..and nss.abc.net..because of the reason that when the NS record is found of the nsp amd nss in the xzy.net...the DNS will get the A  from the  abc.net ZONE...
> am i right..till now..??? (if ! 0  then ..:-))what if put the A records of the nsp and nss next to the NS records in the xyz.net..
> will that work...??? or will it still go to the abc.net for the A records...???

If you put A records for nsp.abc.net and nss.abc.net in the xyz.net zone file, BIND will reject them as "out of zone data". They belong in the abc.net zone file (and possibly also in the nsp.abc.net and/or nss.abc.net zone files if those are delegated
subzones).

> 3..ok its the last 1..:-)
>  // a zone file of abc.net...
>
>   @   IN  NS   ns1.abc.net.
>   @   IN  NS   ns2.abc.net.
>   @   IN  A    123.123.123.123
>
> 3.1>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> i know that i can  als o define it as
>  @  IN  NS  ns1
>             ns2
> ...can i ???
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Sure. The parser substitutes "@" for the leading whitespace.

> 3.2
> why am i giving "@  IN A  123.123.123.123" insted of
> ns1   IN  A   123.123.123.123
> ns2   IN  A   321.321.321.321
> ?????
> or in other words when the A record of the NS is deefined
> do we have to define it like "@  IN  A  123.123.123.123"
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

No, when you use "@" on the righthand side (either explicitly or by following "@" entries with leading-whitespace entries), you're defining an A record for "@" (i.e. abc.net), but when you put "ns1" or "ns2" on the righthand side, you're defining an
A record for "ns1.abc.net" or "ns2.abc.net". Even though the address for "@" and "ns1" may be the same, the names of the records are different.

                                                                                                                                                    - Kevin