split DNS?

[Kevin Darcy]

Kevin Darcy wrote:
> Sky Me wrote:
>   
>> 2007/5/25, Kevin Darcy <kcd at daimlerchrysler.com>:
>>
>>     
>>> If you're differentiating the answers based on the address range(s)
>>> containing the source addresses of the queries, you've basically
>>> reinvented the "view" feature of BIND 9.
>>>       
>> Hello Kevin,
>>
>> What's BIND 9's "view" feature?
>>
>>
>>     
>>> I'm not sure why you need the nested CNAME though: why not just have
>>> foo.split.example.com resolve to 11.11.11.11 for ISP A's clients and to
>>> 22.22.22.22 for ISP B's clients?
>>>       
>> This is because Stanford::DNSserver framework doesn't have the same
>> convenient config directives like BIND.So I just return a CNAME from
>> this custom-built dns server,and this CNAME would be paresed to an A
>> address finally by main DNS (BIND).
>>
>>
>>     
>>> Or, for that matter, have foo.example.com itself resolve differently.
>>>       
>> Yes this is the thing I'm confused for.Does BIND support the feature
>> of differentiating the answers based on the address range(s)
>> containing the source addresses of the queries?
>>
>>     
> Yes. Check out doc/arm/Bv9ARM.ch06.html#view_statement_grammar relative 
> to the top-level of the BIND distribution.
>
>   
Perhaps I should have also mentioned that ISC provides the ARM 
documentation online. Follow Software>BIND>Documentation/References from 
the http://www.isc.org home page.

                                                                         
                     - Kevin