I can't point you to a specific document... BUT... Once upon a time, it
mattered a lot. Today, it doesn't.
Somewhere along the BIND 4.x.x series, BIND began to roundrobin all entries
(Including MX records, actually -- But MX records have a priority, which
overrides at the MTA itself), effectively loadsharing naturally. This
reduced a service provider's ability to direct most queries to one server,
and use others as backups, but it has the advantage simple natural load
balancing.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Hsieh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 6:57 PM
Subject: primary vs. "secondary" nameservers
> Hello,
>
> It has been mentioned on this list that the order of domain nameservers
does
> not matter. Is there an authoritative document somewhere that states this
as
> fact and explains why? I have a customer who says their ISP insists that
the
> nameserver order does matter, and that they want it listed in a particular
> order. I'm looking for a document that would convince them otherwise...
>
> Thanks,
> Steve
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
========================================================
Dave Warren,
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Priority: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
========================================================
