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. Mikkel -- Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- fedora-list mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines