In message <CADZyTkkyqTu5D2-Fxke33XUns4uOSV7zbsW=9unwrbv1gzk...@mail.gmail.com>, Daniel Mig ault writes: > > Hi Juliusz, > > >From the discussion this morning, this is my understanding how how multiple > should be handled: DNS architecture does not allow one secondary with > multiple primaries. This means that if multiple CPE are used for a given > DNS(SEC) Homenet Zone, each of them must have their own set of secondaries. > One specific case is when one set has all the secondaries and the other > have an empty set of secondaries. > > Regarding the co-location of the hidden primary and the CPE. The document > mostly details a primary/secondary configuration which does not depend on > the which device is hosting the primary. Because most probably the primary > will be hosted on a CPE, then we also document interactions with other > services that are generally hosted on CPE. > > We asked at the Toronto meeting whether the denomination CPE should be > changed and replace by something like HIDDEN_PRIMARY_HOST or something > equivalent. The agreement at that time was that using CPE was fine and that > it eases the comprehension of the document. > > BR, > Daniel
Aditionally there is one forward namespace and multiple reverse namespaces. CPE A may be master for the forward namespace and master for reverse space A. CPE B may be a slave for the forward namespace and master for reverse space B. Updates can be directeded at eithe CPE A or B for the forward space while updates to the reverse namespace are directed at the appropriate CPE. Multi-master is a unsolved problem in the DNS. -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: [email protected] _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
