Name server placement

[McNutt, Justin M.]

> 	Non-authoritative answer:
> 	missouri.edu	nameserver = argus.more.net
> 	missouri.edu	nameserver = ns2.psi.net
> 	missouri.edu	nameserver = noc.missouri.edu
> 	missouri.edu	nameserver = ns3.missouri.edu
> 	missouri.edu	nameserver = jupiter.cc.umr.edu
> 
> 	Authoritative answers can be found from:
> 	argus.more.net	internet address = 150.199.1.11
> 	ns2.psi.net	internet address = 38.8.50.2
> 	noc.missouri.edu	internet address = 128.206.2.252
> 	ns3.missouri.edu	internet address = 128.206.10.3
> 	jupiter.cc.umr.edu	internet address = 131.151.254.243
> 
> Five is not an exorbitant number, I think.  I see that you, more.net,
> and umr.edu share some DNS hosting ... actually, umr.edu does NOT list
> you as a name server: oh, well, you got one free.  ;-)  That leaves
> PSInet as the only ones whom you would be paying; and I suspect that
> would be free if they are your ISP.
> 
> So what licensing fees would you be paying?  Certainly not for BIND!
> ;-)  Unless someone tricked you into paying for what everyone 
> else gets
> for free!  ;-)  ;-)  Are you using some other software for which you
> pay licensing fees on a per-name server basis, even if the name server
> is not under your control?  Sounds like some cheap Micro$oft trick.

Actually, it's a Lucent trick and has to do with the way QIP (our IP/DNS
management platform) works.  There are some evil ways around it in the
software, but I'd rather just do fewer zone transfers and notifications when
we make changes (which is constantly).

> Incidentally, please note the order of the PEER SERVERS above.  Next
> time I look, it is likely to be different.  To the resolvers, there is
> NO SUCH THING as "primary" or "secondary".  All servers are peer
> servers, and are (at first) equally likely to be chosen 
> first.  You can
> change that for local lookups; but once they're in another 
> name server's
> cache, they're subject to that server's distribution policy.  This may
> be round robin, or best first, or something else; but it has 
> nothing to
> do with what you told EduNIC is your "primary" vs. your "secondary".

Oh, I know.  I was referring to what was in Network Solutions' information
when we went to change authority for the domains.  I realize that "primary"
and "secondary" are pretty much illusory.  Even "master" and "slave" only
make a difference to the servers themselves.

> Finally, why have off-site secondaries at all?  I send mail to a few
> sites that have only one name server, or two on the same network and
> power, which for this purpose is the same as "none".  If their network
> and/or power are down, and I try to send them e-mail, the mail server
> will tell me that the mail address is invalid, since there is no host
> by that name.  Fortunately, most sites either don't go down 
> ever [;-)],
> or come back up quickly enough that their info hasn't faded from my
> cache, or have another name server elsewhere that returns their MX and
> Address information.  Then my mail server goes into store-and-forward
> mode, and only returns it to me after N days have passed, and the
> information is stale anyway.  ;-)

This is pretty much the conclusion I came to, so it's nice for me that you
agree.  :-)  I think this is the design I'm going to use if I don't hear of
any good reason not to.

--J