Need some clarification on Delegation

[Mark Damrose]

"Rakesh-Shah-Pop" <rshah at rupalifinechem.com> wrote in message
news:a6p8p7$mja at pub3.rc.vix.com...
> Hi,
> I have a quick question if some one can help me clarify my doubt on
Delegation .
>
> From what I understand is for example I have domain foobar.com and a
sub-domain  corp.foobar.com
>
>  foobar.com (Running on Bind Unix)
> corp.foobar.com (Running on Win 2k)
>
> Now for corp.foobar.com to resolve and send queries to Win 2k box there
has to a reference in db.foorbar.com with a NS record for corp.foobar.com
and A record correct ?
>
> I have a similar setup and here I do not find any NS record for
corp.foobar.com  in db.foobar.com file but
>  named.conf of this Unix machine act's as slave for corp.foobar.com and
has the zone in place.
>
> So how does the it resolves the corp.foobar.com without foobar.com
pointing to the nameserver of corp.foobar.com?

It resolves because the unix machine is a slave - so it is authoritive for
both domains.  When a query for corp.foobar.com gets to the unix machine it
simply answers.

>
> How ever everything works fine without any  problem.....................
>
> or I am missing some thing here ?

What you are missing is that no queries ever go to the Win2k machine.  It is
in effect a "hidden" primary.  If you want it to share the load, you should
add NS records for both the unix and 2k machine and A records for both.
Even if you want it to continue to work as it is, there should be an NS and
A record for the unix.

>
> Thank you for your help.
> Rakesh Shah
>
>
>