BIND primary + secondary, how and how many

[Iñaki Martínez]

> Other nameservers don't really care which of your nameserver is master
> for a zone, and which are slaves:
> they will fail over to a working, faster authoritative nameserver,
> regardless of whether it is master or slave.
 
OK..... is it important the order of the nameservers in the whois
database????
 I mean when you creates/changes the nameservers in the registrar.
 
> So, from a performance/server-reliability you may as well go with
> whatever is easier to maintain. This would normally entail making one
> server the master for all of the domains.

 Ok, it is easier to maintain with one master and rest slaves..... :-)

 
> However, you should also assess the impact of not being able to make
> changes to one or more domains while the master is down. Can you
really
> tolerate not being able to change *any* of your 4 domains while the
> master which hosts all of 4 of them is down? Perhaps it would be
better
> to soften the impact by spreading the master duties around. 

 Changes to the domains are not so often, so i can tolerate not being
able to change any domain for a time....

> On the other
> hand, if you're setting up an automatic or semi-automatic "in case of
> disaster, reconfigure slave as temporary master" mechanism, it might
be
> easier to do this for only one master and one of the slaves...

 Well, how much interesting is to reconfigure a slave to master when the
real master is down????
 Which of the slave is better to reconfigure to master????


 Thank you for your answer......