On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 01:27:17PM -0600, Dave Warren wrote:
> > Multiple IPs per host, now that one I don't get at all. Since you can
> > define way more nameservers for a domain than could ever be necessary
> > for
> > redundancy (I know it is at least eight), why not just create separate
> > host entries for each IP? Seems more flexible and scalable that way to
> > me, though maybe it requires a little more attention to administer
> > changes.
>
> There is one advantage: I'm an ISP, I over 10,000 names right now. I
> just decided to add a third nameserver.
>
> Rather then notifying all my clients about ns3.* I could just add the IP
> to ns1.* and be done with it.
Also, its not always about redundancy, its also about distributing the load.
The only real limit on the number of nameservers returned is the size of
the UDP packet. Multiple IPs for 1 name means you can get more nameservers
into the packet.
--
John Payne http://www.sackheads.org/jpayne/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.sackheads.org/uce/ Fax: +44 870 0547954
To send me mail, use the address in the From: header
