Hello, Thomas. I’m not from the xCAT development team but I’m curious with your question.
In your example you mean that the name server info on the SOA field is not available on the NS fields of a given zone, right? If this is correct I think xCAT is doing right to notify only the name servers on the NS fields, because the name server on the SOA record may be unreachable from the client sending the updates, depending on the architecture of the domain. A truly hidden master is only reachable from its slaves. Or I’ve lost something that I don’t understand? Sent from my iPhone > On 25 Nov 2019, at 11:15, Thomas HUMMEL <thomas.hum...@pasteur.fr> wrote: > > Hello, > > From what I've seen, when using an external DNS server, xCAT's 'makedns' > command looks for the NS records for the zone and sends them the update. > > What's the reasoning behind this instead of, let's say, sending the update to > the MNAME field (primary master) of the SOA record, as for instance the > 'nsupdate' command does when no 'server' directive is used ? > > As a matter of fact, in a setup consisting of (with bind/named) : > > - a (hidden) master > - 2 slaves (only them have the NS records for the zone) > > it leads to unneccessary transfers : > > - xCAT sends update to slave(s) > - slaves forward the update to the master > - master notify the slaves > - records get transfered from master to slaves > > Thanks > > -- > TH > > > > _______________________________________________ > xCAT-user mailing list > xCAT-user@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcat-user _______________________________________________ xCAT-user mailing list xCAT-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcat-user
