RE: [ActiveDir] DNS Question - Conditional Forwarding or Secondar y Zone Stub

[Dean Wells]

Title: DNS Question - Conditional Forwarding or Secondary Zone Stub

It doesn't since conditional forwarders are maintained internally as a zone type :( -- Dean Wells MSEtechnology * Email: dwells@msetechnology.com http://msetechnology.com   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Myrick, Todd (NIH/CC/DNA) Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 11:24 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DNS Question - Conditional Forwarding or Secondar y Zone Stub Regarding scenarios my preference is to use Stub Zones for Internal AD DDNS environments (Like Tree to Tree (Within a forest) or Forest to Forest DNS resolution).   I haven’t had much experience with Conditional Forwarding, one thing I would like to try is to see if it would make hosting split brain DNS zones with out the need to sync them manually or through scripting.   Thanks,   Todd Myrick From: Dean Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 10:35 AM To: Send - AD mailing list Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DNS Question - Conditional Forwarding or Secondary Zone Stub   Having reviewed this thread, I'd like to note that the use of conditional forwarding for a particular namespace is not, relatively speaking, computationally expensive.  Mere string comparisons do not require significantly more effort than that of locating a record within the local cache or a local zone (though I've not personally tested it to that degree, I'd hazard a guess that it's quite the reverse).   I'll admit to having not read the afore mentioned links so if I'm dup'ing anything, my apologies.    Re: stub zones or cond. forwarding, I generally apply the following rational when trying to explain an architectural design decision or teaching a class ... consider the following -   * stub zones     - fault tolerant     - automated load balancing     - intelligent distributed configuration (AD integration)     - self updating (limited)     - may expire     - no re-configuration required for target namespace   * conditional forwarders exhibit     - fault tolerant     - no automated load-balancing     - unintelligent distributed configuration (AD integration)     - not self updating (static knowledge)     - never expires     - no re-configuration required for target namespace   I'd certainly agree with Al's comment that conditional forwarders have their place when a predictable path of resolution is required since stub zones round-robin resolution attempts, other than that I personally consider conditional forwarding a quick and dirty mechanism offering little advantages.   Dean   -- Dean Wells MSEtechnology * Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://msetechnology.com     From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 6:12 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: [ActiveDir] DNS Question - Conditional Forwarding or Secondary Zone Stub I’ve done some reading but can’t seem to surmise the best practice when trying to decide between using a secondary stub or conditional forwarding when both technologies could address a requirement.  I’ve a situation for a disjointed namespace where the root servers would hold the zone.  Since either secondary stub or conditional forwarding would solve it, what’s the best approach for this? TIA -m