To:
dnsop@cafax.se
From:
Mans Nilsson <mansaxel@sunet.se>
Date:
Sun, 22 Apr 2001 12:15:09 +0200
In-Reply-To:
<Pine.BSF.4.30.0104221054260.4948-100000@spider.nic-se.se>
Sender:
owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: Tips for DNS zone administration
Subject: Re: Tips for DNS zone administration Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:01:05AM +0200 Quoting Mats Dufberg (dufberg@nic-se.se): > > I still don't get what combination is bad. I guess that you do not mean > > namn.se. soa () > ns ns.namn.se. > mx mail.namn.se. I interpret that as "good" too. (given that A records are added, of course) > Do you mean that is bad to have > > namn.se. soa () > ns jox.namn.se. > mx jox.namn.se. > jox a 192.0.2.10 > > > or do you mean > > namn.se. soa () > ns namn.se. > mx namn.se. > a 192.0.2.10 Both, I would guess -- and this not from a DNS tech standpoint but from a sysdamin / user interaction point. We all know the hassle of renumbering your resolver machine, having to find all hosts that might resolve via it and then convincing the admins/users that changing /etc/resolv.conf is a Good Thing Right Now Or Your Lookups Will Fail... "Overloading" names means that you tie lots of important functions to one single node, which means that any change to that node will affect many services. Better then to have different names (even if the finally resolve to the same host, either via CNAME or multiple A) something like this: namn.se. SOA () NS ns NS host.upstream.isp. MX 1 mail ns A 192.0.2.2 burk A 192.0.2.2 mail A 192.0.2.2 www CNAME burk ntp CNAME burk smtp CNAME burk ; this is the smtp relay for ; outbound mail; we type 'smtp.namn.se.' ; in users MUA configs. Now I've bored you with obviousities enough! -- Måns Nilsson Systems Specialist +46 70 681 7204 KTHNOC MN1334-RIPE I want another RE-WRITE on my CAESAR SALAD!!