IP (not zone) delegation

[Dean Carrera]

I'm not sure I follow you on this Mark. I'm working thru the same issue. =
The forward DNS delegation is working fine but I'm a little confused on =
how to set up the reverse. When you say populate the zone with static do =
you mean with individual records for each host?  I guess not because =
that would defeat the purpose of delegation.

Thanks...

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Damrose [mailto:mdamrose at elgin.cc.il.us]
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 5:02 PM
To: comp-protocols-dns-bind at isc.org
Subject: Re: IP (not zone) delegation


"Kevin Darcy" <kcd at daimlerchrysler.com> wrote in message
news:am83p0$v9$1 at isrv4.isc.org...
>
> "Smith, John" wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> >         Background: We are in the process of installing DNS =
internally.
> > Based on a consultant's design suggestions we are configuring the =
zones
as
> > follows (I will use test.net as the *example* zone):
> >
> >         ------------
> >         | test.net | (All non-Windows boxes are in this zone.  This =
will
be
> > a Bind server.)
> >         ------------
> >               |
> >               | delegation
> >               |
> >         ---------------
> >         | ms.test.net | (All Windows boxes are in this subzone.  =
This
will
> > be a Windows 2000 DNS server.)
> >         ---------------
> >
> >         The question I have is how to handle in-addr.arpa =
delegations.
One
> > side of our router has 172.16.111.0/24 addresses that contain a =
mixture
of
> > Windows and non-Windows systems.  The other side of our router has
> > 172.16.112.0/24 addresses that are primarily Windows boxes but have =
a
small
> > percentage of 'others'.
> >
> >         Given this set up how should or can we handle in-addr.arpa
> > delegations, or is another design 'better' and why?
>
> Assuming everything stays static, you should be able to use the RFC =
2317
> technique (basically just aliasing the PTR records) to permit the PTRs =
in
the
> "mixed" reverse zone to resolve from the MS-DNS server.

Why?  The forward zone is irrelevant.  The in-addr zones fall on byte
boundaries.  Create 2 zones 111.16.172.in-addr.arpa. and
112.16.172.in-addr.arpa.  populate them - either static or dynamic.  =
Better
yet, set it up on both.  Then no matter which your clients use as a
resolver, it has authoritive data.  It also keeps you from having to set =
up
special cases to keep the private IP resolution from trying the public
servers.

>
> However, if you want to implement Dynamic Update of reverse entries,
you're
> probably SOL, since last I heard, Win2K's Dynamic Update =
implementation
wasn't
> RFC 2317 aware...
>
>
> - Kevin
>
>
>
>