secondary server install

[Nico Kadel-Garcia]

Barry Margolin wrote:

> In article <bgvllh$og3$1 at sf1.isc.org>,
> Bill Friedman  <_billf at lfnetworking.com> wrote:
> 
>>This is my first BIND install....a few questions.
>>
>>1. Is it okay to run different versions of BIND on master and slave 
>>servers, e.g. 9.2.1 and 9.2.2 respectively? I'd just as soon not upgrade 
>>the existing server if not necessary.
> 
> 
> Sure.  It would be pretty difficult for ISPs to provide secondary DNS
> services if they had to ensure that *all* their customers were running the
> same version of BIND as they were.  In fact, a large number of our
> customers aren't even running BIND at all -- Windows 2000 DNS has become
> very popular in the past few years.

This answer does not compute. He's discussing a master and slave, not a 
master DNS server and the DNS *client* on a user's desktop. Slaves are 
used to publish the DNS information to spare DNS servers, so if the 
first one is unavailable or farther away the client will speak to the 
nearer server.


> No, you should put the master server's IP in the "masters" clause.  You don't
> need "allow-transfer" on the slave, because the ISP's servers will continue
> transfering from the master, not the slave.

Good point!!!

It's also sometimes useful to allow transfers to your engineer's 
machines, so they can do zone transfers themselves and see that what is 
coming out is what they indeed expect.