Strange problem

[Clenna Lumina]

Måns Nilsson wrote:
> --On mC%ndag, mC%ndag 25 jun 2007 09.14.57 -0700 Clenna Lumina
> <savagebeaste at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> Any flaws or problems here, or something I missed? (I'm asking this
>>>> for educational benefit, as one never knows if they'll done day
>>>> need it :)
>>>>> It is over-engineered, but nothing else.
>>
>> Is there a beter way to do it? The scenario I posed was just
>> something I jotted down on the fly.
>
> I do not believe in split DNS and blocking things, however I
> recognize the need for such legacy. Hidden masters may be cool, for
> upscale stuff like ccTLDen. Otherwise, I'd just do like so:
> (all names and IP addresses are example values)
>
> namn.se. NS master.namn.se.
> namn.se. NS slave.namn.se.
> namn.se. NS extserver.localhost.se.
> master.namn.se. A 192.0.2.1
> slave.namn.se. A 192.0.2.2
>
> (extserver is somewhere else, connected via another ISP)
>
> /* This is the master named.conf */
> zone "namn.se" {
> type master;
> allow-transfer { any; };
> file "master/namn.se";
> };
>
> /* This is the slave named.conf */
> zone "namn.se" {
> type slave;
> allow-transfer { any; };
> file "slave/namn.se";
> masters {
> 192.0.2.1;
> };
> };
>
> /* This is the extslave named.conf */
> zone "namn.se" {
> type slave;
> allow-transfer { any; };
> file "slave/namn.se";
> masters {
> 192.0.2.1;
> 192.0.2.2;
> };
> };

Nice and elegant. Me likes. :)

> ...which is cool and works really nice. Simple, easy to debug and so
> on. If at all possible, I'd avoid using stuff like split DNS and
> non-routed addresses, because the DNS is about everybody getting the
> same data and keeping things simple. This config will get anyone with
> ability to query the public DNS the right data in a speedy manner
> with minimal fuss. Which is what we want, for the most part.

All true. I always did admire a simple yet fully functional solution.

-- 
CL