Re: Virtual DNS questiona and reverse lookup table conflicts

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 15:09:08 -0800,
>   "Daniel B. Thurman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> This whole thing started because it is recommended that you have two dns
>> servers for fail-over/redundancy - of which I haven't been able to solve  
>> (yet).
> Do you have two separate internet connections? If not, there isn't a lot
> of point in having two DNS servers. When your network is out, no one
> is going to be able to contact your servers and providing DNS service during
> the outage isn't going to help. For the typical hobbiest running a server or
> two on a residential or SOHO broadband connection it doesn't make sense to
> have two DNS servers. (If you have two physical servers you probably want to
> have some way for one to take over capabilities of the other, but they both
> don't need to be externally visible at the same time.)
Having slave name server that is not on your machines is probably a
good idea - that way, instead of getting a not found error, they
would get a not available error. With the first case, people will
probably think they have the wrong URL, but with the second case,
they will think that the server is down.


  Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

fedora-list mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe:

[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux