BIND primary + secondary, how and how many

[Iñaki Martínez]

> >  I have 4 servers (each in a diferent location and network), each of
> > them have a domain with Web (apache), ftp, mail (sendmail) and bind.
> > 
> >  NOW *each* server has configured Bind with its own domain as primary
> > and the rest of domains (of the other three servers) as slaves.
> > 
> >  Then each server is primary of the domain it owns and is secondary of
> > the rest os the domains.
> > 
> >  More graphically (NOW):
> > 
> >  Server     primary    slaves
> >  ---------  ---------  -------------------------
> >  Server1    domain1    domain2, domain3, domain4
> >  Server2    domain2    domain1, domain3, domain4
> >  Server3    domain3    domain1, domain2, domain4
> >  Server4    domain4    domain1, domain2, domain3
> > 
> > 
> >  Well, my question is:
> > 
> >  Is this an optimal configuration???
> 
> 	No.  It really depends upon where the people who are
> 	administrating the zones are located and what the zones
> 	are representing.

 Well, i administrate ALL servers and ALL domains.
 Each server and its domain are independent of others.
 
> 	I've done it both ways in the past.  Where the zones were
> 	representing different physical sites, the masters were
> 	within those sites.  You can add / remove machines without
> 	external network connectivity.

 Although i administrate remotely i can call a person within those sites
to make changes (or even move myself to those sites).

 
> 	When the zones were spread over all the sites I done it from
> 	a central location.

 OK, then i understand that in my case it is better to have ONE master
and the rest slaves, right????


 Also, as commented in other email, it is a good idea to have a
configuration to convert a slave to a master.
 But what slave server convert to master??? the second, third, ....  ???


 Thank you for your answer.........