secondary vs. delegation

[Barry Margolin]

In article <9ht1n5$kvj at pub3.rc.vix.com>,
Brian Noecker  <bnoecker at webb.net> wrote:
>
>I've gotten myself confused a bit on justifying delegation.  We do DNS
>service for a company foo.com that wants to run their own DNS servers for
>internal corp.foo.com.  We are looking at delgating the corp.foo.com to
>their name server so they can administer the zone file how they want.  Their
>internal corp.foo.com servers are all internal IP address 192.168.x.x
>servers.
>
>My question is, why justification is there to delegate rather than to just
>be a secondary for a subdomain?

The two issues are independent.  In order for them to administer the
subdomain themselves, you *have* to delegate it; otherwise, you'll just
look in the foo.com zone for everything.  If you want, you can also be
secondary for the subdomain, but this doesn't remove the need to delegate
it.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar at genuity.net
Genuity, 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.