To Outsource , or Not to Outsource....

[Kevin Darcy]

The more steps you add to the process, and the more organizationlly
separate the responsible parties are, the more possibility there is of a
miscommunication or other kind of bureaucratic snafu. If you're like most
businesses, even a small amount of downtime as a result of such an error
is worth way more than the cost of running your own master (which, if all
it is doing is providing very occasional zone transfers to a small number
of slaves, can run comfortably on a low-end Intel architecture, e.g. a
486, or could even run on a "borrowed" virtual interface on some box you
already own).


- Kevin

Michael Martin wrote:

> That is the question?
>
> THE BACKGROUND.
> My company currently maintains a BIND 8 Primary/Master server. This
> server does accept queries it just provides the zone files for our
> listed secondary DNS servers. Our secondary service is provided by our
> ISP.
>
> NOW THE PROBLEM.
> The suits in my company want to do away with our master DNS server,
> and have
> our ISP maintain the Primary/Master (ie.. our zone files) We then
> would have to email our ISP if we need any changes or additions to the
> zones files. Which
> to be honest are not that many per month, and some months we don't
> make any changes at all.
>
> I am opposed to outsoaring the Primary/Master Server.
> However, am having a some trouble convincing the suits to keep in in
> house. I am hoping the BIND community can help me with some convincing
> data on why a company should maintain its own primary/Master server.
>
> thanks
> Michael