On Wed 17 August 2011 14:22:21 kashani did opine thusly: > On 8/17/2011 2:08 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: > > On Wed 17 August 2011 13:56:10 Grant did opine thusly: > >> I currently use a free service to host the DNS records for my > >> website, but I'm thinking of running a DNS server on the same > >> machine that runs my website instead. Would that be fairly > >> trivial to set up and maintain? If so, which package should > >> I use?> > > The first question is Why? > > > > There's no real benefit, it's a huge amount of work for little > > gain, you carry the cost of increased traffic yourself, and if > > that host goes blip, you not only lose access to the web server > > but to the entire zone as well. > > > > Technically there's no good reason why you can't co-host web and > > dns. However, depending on your upper level domain and > > registrar, TWO dns servers may be a requirement (this is the > > norm) and you propose only one. Where's the second one going to > > be? Only one is a very bad idea indeed. > > > > Your last two questions reveal that this is not something you > > are > > familiar with already, so I highly recommend you investigate > > everything thoroughly and fully understand just what you are > > letting yourself in for before deciding. > > > > If you simply don't like your current DNS provider, then finding > > a different one you do like is quite simple. > > Exactly what Alan said. It's not worth it and no registar will let > you do it on one IP.
I'm just itching to type up the long list of horror stories I've stored from people doing their own DNS thinking it was real easy. But there's this little thing called an NDA and it says I can't :-( Truly though, the devastation from DNS mistakes is horrendous. The primary error folk make is this: You do not configure and treat the DNS service like any other service. You do not USE the internet to maintain dns, as dns BUILDS the internet. It's a subtle distinction but a vital one. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
