Re: DNS Question
Chuck Swiger wrote: On Oct 23, 2009, at 10:31 AM, Matthew Seaman wrote: You aren't supposed to use CNAMES for anything found in other RR's; in particular, you should always use an A record with the hostnames used for nameservers (ie, have an NS record), because you are supposed to be using the canonical name rather than an alias. Errr? You mean the rule that NS and MX and SRV rdata must include an A record rather than a CNAME? That's true, but what does that have to do with web serving? Consider the case of redirects involving cnames; you end up with a lot of extra DNS traffic. The illegality mentioned further upthread is that you can't use a CNAME at a zone apex because of the 'CNAME and other data rule'[*] -- as there's always got to be SOA and NS records at the zone apex, if you want a web page at 'example.com' you'ld have to provide an A or record for it. Unless you're Verisign and have control over the nameservers for .com, this is almost certainly illegal: example.com. IN CNAME www.example.com On the other hand: www.example.com. IN CNAME example.com. is generally fine. It's generally fine, sure, but almost never ideal. You don't save traffic by using CNAMEs instead of A records PS: It's odd where google pulls up references to fairly canonical docs, sometimes. I'm not sure I even recognize ua, and I suspect I deal with two-letter ISO 3166 country names more than most folks do. Maybe Ukraine? :-) Of course it's Ukraine. .uk was already taken, even though the two letter iso-code for this country is officially .gb. We're in an exclusive club of two nations that generally don't use their official iso-code in the DNS. No prizes for guessing which the other one is. Shucks, how can you pull in Jeopardy references and then deny giving out prizes? Well, my guess would be ie, although people who speak Finnish and call their home Suomi might find fi odd, also Cheers, Matthew [*] Little known factoid, but there are two legal exceptions to the 'CNAME and other data' rule. You can have RRSIG or NSEC records at the same label as CNAME -- see RFC 4035. Obscure DNS trivia for 100, Alex... Regards, Just so everyone knows, having a domain with a CNAME at the top will hose your mail traffic. We tried it, and some servers delivered fine, others did not. Checking with dig +trace, and dns stuff, showed the problem. Just trying to get a MX record for mainstreetfin.com would fail. The record we had was, mainstreetfin.com CNAME website.elliemae.com And the problem is shown below. --- DNS Lookup: mainstreetfin.com MX record Searching for mainstreetfin.com MX record at a.root-servers.net [198.41.0.4]: Got referral to M.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. (zone: com.) [took 39 ms] Searching for mainstreetfin.com MX record at M.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. [192.55.83.30]: Got referral to ns2auth.tls.net. (zone: mainstreetfin.com.) [took 11 ms] Searching for mainstreetfin.com MX record at ns2auth.tls.net. [65.123.104.30]: Got CNAME of website.elliemae.com. and referral to k.root-servers.net [took 36 ms] Searching for website.elliemae.com MX record at g.root-servers.net [192.112.36.4]: Got referral to I.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. (zone: com.) [took 143 ms] Searching for website.elliemae.com MX record at I.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. [192.43.172.30]: Got referral to ns2.elliemae.net. (zone: elliemae.com.) [took 63 ms] Searching for website.elliemae.com MX record at ns2.elliemae.net. [63.241.88.21]: Timed out. Trying again. Searching for website.elliemae.com MX record at ns2.elliemae.net. [63.241.88.21]: Timed out. Trying again. Searching for website.elliemae.com MX record at ns1.elliemae.net. [216.35.165.21]: Reports that no MX records exist. [took 46 ms] Response: No MX records exist for website.elliemae.com. [Neg TTL=300 seconds] Details: ns1.elliemae.net. (an authoritative nameserver for elliemae.com.) says that there are no MX records for website.elliemae.com. The E-mail address in charge of the elliemae.com. zone is: hostmas...@elliemae.com. NOTE: One or more CNAMEs were encountered. mainstreetfin.com is really website.elliemae.com. So some mail servers never asked our authoritative servers what the MX record was. Interesting. DAve -- Posterity, you will know how much it cost the present generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in heaven that ever I took half the pains to preserve it. John Quincy Adams http://appleseedinfo.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: DNS Question
DAve wrote: Good morning. I have been asked by my co-workers and sales why I always create a A record for new domains we host instead of a CNAME. The issue I run into lately with some domains is that a client has a website with a industry host such as frank.relator.com and he wants to have DNS point www.frank.com to frank.relator.com with a CNAME. The client does not want an A record for frank.com. Somewhere, in a class far far away, I was taught a DNS zone had to have a A record to function properly. I can't seem to locate anything in the RFCs. Am I wrong? Yes, you're wrong. In terms of web service, you can use either an A record or a CNAME record to provide the address part of a site's URL[*]. As far as the web server is concerned, it looks for the 'Host=' line in the HTTP packet to decide what name-based VHOST to dispatch the query to internally, and doesn't necessarily do any DNS lookups at all. Web clients just do a gethostbyname(3) or getaddrinfo(3) call to resolve the site name into an IP, and anything supported by those (/etc/hosts, NIS, LDAP, DNS) will do the trick. In terms of the DNS a 'Zone' is a delegated block of the name space under a single administrative control. Typically with BIND this maps onto a single 'Zone file' containing all of the DNS resource records for the zone. The only records a zone *has* to have are: * 1 SOA record, with the zone serial number * Some number of NS records giving the nameservers for the zone. It's perfectly permissible to have a zone that doesn't contain any A records (or records) and in fact, reasonably common: reverse domains generally contain mostly PTR records. Cheers, Matthew [*] Possibly others, but A and CNAME are the vast majority. Being able to use SRV for webservers would be cool. -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate Kent, CT11 9PW signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: DNS Question
Sean Cavanaugh wrote: Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 08:30:08 -0400 From: dave.l...@pixelhammer.com To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: DNS Question Good morning. I have been asked by my co-workers and sales why I always create a A record for new domains we host instead of a CNAME. The issue I run into lately with some domains is that a client has a website with a industry host such as frank.relator.com and he wants to have DNS point www.frank.com to frank.relator.com with a CNAME. The client does not want an A record for frank.com. Somewhere, in a class far far away, I was taught a DNS zone had to have a A record to function properly. I can't seem to locate anything in the RFCs. Am I wrong? I think you are confusing basics of DNS records. you are partially correct in that a DNS zone needs an initial A record to be able to translate a name to an IP, but there is nothing wrong about setting up a CNAME to point to a record in a different zone instead. you just cannot do a zone that has a CNAME only that does not at some point to a valid A record. CNAMEs are forwarders only whereas A records are actual lookups. for proper way to set this up The A record would be assigned for the main name that you want to associate to an IP address. The CNAME record just relates a different name to that original name. this allows you to change the IP address of the server and only have to update the original A record instead of every DNS record for that server. for small number of vhosts, this would not really be an issue, but imagine if you were hosting a couple hundred vhosts from a single IP and then had to change that IP because you switched your ISP. It would take you a LONG time to update them if they were all A records, but only a couple of seconds if you had it properly set up as CNAME's www.bobshosting.com http://www.bobshosting.comA 192.168.0.1 www.vhost1.com http://www.vhost1.com CNAME www.bobshosting.com http://www.bobshosting.com. www.vhost2.com http://www.vhost2.com CNAME www.bobshosting.com http://www.bobshosting.com. www.vhost3.com http://www.vhost3.com CNAME www.bobshosting.com http://www.bobshosting.com. www.vhost4.com http://www.vhost4.com CNAME www.bobshosting.com http://www.bobshosting.com. -Sean All true, and I did not do a very good job of explaining it. My issue was that we have requests to use a CNAME for the domain record. Such as this. example.com CNAME otherdomain.com www.example.com CNAME otherdomain.com I was taught this was not good form, but allowed. I can deal with it. But what of having a SOA record for example.com, no A or CNAME record for the TLD example.com, only hosts such as www, ns1, ftp, etc. I tried it an it seems to work fine, but doesn't look proper to me. Then again I remember when CNAME were considered evil. DAve -- Posterity, you will know how much it cost the present generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in heaven that ever I took half the pains to preserve it. John Quincy Adams http://appleseedinfo.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: DNS Question
All true, and I did not do a very good job of explaining it. My issue was that we have requests to use a CNAME for the domain record. Such as this. example.com CNAME otherdomain.com www.example.com CNAME otherdomain.com I was taught this was not good form worse, it's illegal. , but allowed. I can deal with it. But what of having a SOA record for example.com, no A or CNAME record for the TLD example.com, only hosts such as www, ns1, ftp, etc. I tried it an it seems to work fine, but doesn't look proper to me. Then again I remember when CNAME were considered evil. CNAMEs are still evil, unless 1) no other solution exists and 2) the user knows how to use CNAMEs (rare). Len ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
RE: DNS Question
All true, and I did not do a very good job of explaining it. My issue was that we have requests to use a CNAME for the domain record. Such as this. example.com CNAME otherdomain.com www.example.com CNAME otherdomain.com I was taught this was not good form worse, it's illegal. how is this illegal? CNAME rule: a node with a CNAME cannot contain any other records. for the node domain.tld: domain.tld. soa ... domain.tld. ns ... domain.tld. cname otherdomain.tld. this node has a CNAME and other data, so it's illegal, no matter what you want to do, or what makes sense to you, or what is convenient for you. Len ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: DNS Question
Hi-- On Oct 23, 2009, at 9:18 AM, Sean Cavanaugh wrote: worse, it's illegal. how is this illegal? if you are residing your domain on a hosting service, this makes sense to me. Granted its bad form and should have an A record to the host for the main domain record, but if i had control over otherdomain.com and not example.com and had to change the IP address, example.com would be dead until i was able to reach the owner of that domain and have them change their DNS info. You aren't supposed to use CNAMES for anything found in other RR's; in particular, you should always use an A record with the hostnames used for nameservers (ie, have an NS record), because you are supposed to be using the canonical name rather than an alias. See: http://docstore.mik.ua/orelly/networking/sendmail/ch21_03.htm#SML2-CH-21-SECT-3-2 You might also find a discussion of webserver redirects and the like interesting: http://www.aitechsolutions.net/cname-serveralias-redirection.html Regards, -- -Chuck PS: It's odd where google pulls up references to fairly canonical docs, sometimes. I'm not sure I even recognize ua, and I suspect I deal with two-letter ISO 3166 country names more than most folks do. Maybe Ukraine? :-) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
RE: DNS Question
how is this illegal? CNAME rule: a node with a CNAME cannot contain any other records. for the node domain.tld: domain.tld. soa ... domain.tld. ns ... domain.tld. cname otherdomain.tld. this node has a CNAME and other data, so it's illegal, no matter what you want to do, or what makes sense to you, or what is convenient for you. ah yes, forgot about that. you are correct on that line. -Sean ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: DNS Question
Chuck Swiger wrote: Hi-- On Oct 23, 2009, at 9:18 AM, Sean Cavanaugh wrote: worse, it's illegal. how is this illegal? if you are residing your domain on a hosting service, this makes sense to me. Granted its bad form and should have an A record to the host for the main domain record, but if i had control over otherdomain.com and not example.com and had to change the IP address, example.com would be dead until i was able to reach the owner of that domain and have them change their DNS info. You aren't supposed to use CNAMES for anything found in other RR's; in particular, you should always use an A record with the hostnames used for nameservers (ie, have an NS record), because you are supposed to be using the canonical name rather than an alias. Errr? You mean the rule that NS and MX and SRV rdata must include an A record rather than a CNAME? That's true, but what does that have to do with web serving? The illegality mentioned further upthread is that you can't use a CNAME at a zone apex because of the 'CNAME and other data rule'[*] -- as there's always got to be SOA and NS records at the zone apex, if you want a web page at 'example.com' you'ld have to provide an A or record for it. Unless you're Verisign and have control over the nameservers for .com, this is almost certainly illegal: example.com. IN CNAME www.example.com On the other hand: www.example.com. IN CNAME example.com. is generally fine. PS: It's odd where google pulls up references to fairly canonical docs, sometimes. I'm not sure I even recognize ua, and I suspect I deal with two-letter ISO 3166 country names more than most folks do. Maybe Ukraine? :-) Of course it's Ukraine. .uk was already taken, even though the two letter iso-code for this country is officially .gb. We're in an exclusive club of two nations that generally don't use their official iso-code in the DNS. No prizes for guessing which the other one is. Cheers, Matthew [*] Little known factoid, but there are two legal exceptions to the 'CNAME and other data' rule. You can have RRSIG or NSEC records at the same label as CNAME -- see RFC 4035. Obscure DNS trivia for 100, Alex... -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate Kent, CT11 9PW signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: DNS Question
On Oct 23, 2009, at 10:31 AM, Matthew Seaman wrote: You aren't supposed to use CNAMES for anything found in other RR's; in particular, you should always use an A record with the hostnames used for nameservers (ie, have an NS record), because you are supposed to be using the canonical name rather than an alias. Errr? You mean the rule that NS and MX and SRV rdata must include an A record rather than a CNAME? That's true, but what does that have to do with web serving? Consider the case of redirects involving cnames; you end up with a lot of extra DNS traffic. The illegality mentioned further upthread is that you can't use a CNAME at a zone apex because of the 'CNAME and other data rule'[*] -- as there's always got to be SOA and NS records at the zone apex, if you want a web page at 'example.com' you'ld have to provide an A or record for it. Unless you're Verisign and have control over the nameservers for .com, this is almost certainly illegal: example.com. IN CNAME www.example.com On the other hand: www.example.com. IN CNAME example.com. is generally fine. It's generally fine, sure, but almost never ideal. You don't save traffic by using CNAMEs instead of A records PS: It's odd where google pulls up references to fairly canonical docs, sometimes. I'm not sure I even recognize ua, and I suspect I deal with two-letter ISO 3166 country names more than most folks do. Maybe Ukraine? :-) Of course it's Ukraine. .uk was already taken, even though the two letter iso-code for this country is officially .gb. We're in an exclusive club of two nations that generally don't use their official iso-code in the DNS. No prizes for guessing which the other one is. Shucks, how can you pull in Jeopardy references and then deny giving out prizes? Well, my guess would be ie, although people who speak Finnish and call their home Suomi might find fi odd, also Cheers, Matthew [*] Little known factoid, but there are two legal exceptions to the 'CNAME and other data' rule. You can have RRSIG or NSEC records at the same label as CNAME -- see RFC 4035. Obscure DNS trivia for 100, Alex... Regards, -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: DNS Question
Also, MX needs to resolve to an A, not a CNAME.. If you are using mail on all these domains, use A records On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Sean Cavanaugh millenia2...@hotmail.com wrote: how is this illegal? CNAME rule: a node with a CNAME cannot contain any other records. for the node domain.tld: domain.tld. soa ... domain.tld. ns ... domain.tld. cname otherdomain.tld. this node has a CNAME and other data, so it's illegal, no matter what you want to do, or what makes sense to you, or what is convenient for you. ah yes, forgot about that. you are correct on that line. -Sean ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: DNS Question
On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 10:33:07 -0700 xSAPPYx xsap...@gmail.com wrote: Also, MX needs to resolve to an A, not a CNAME.. If you are using mail on all these domains, use A records You can use the domains for mail provided that that they share MX servers, if example.com has a CNAME pointing to example.net then mail to example.com will use the mx servers for example.net. What you shouldn't do is mix the CNAME with separate MX records because it creates an ambiguity. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: DNS Question
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 国徽 wrote: Hello, I am building the DNS Server,But I can't find the script /etc/namedb/make-localhost used in the document, So I can't go on now? Please tell me how to find the script,Thank you very much! Unfortunately the documentation is a bit out of date. You no longer need to run 'make-localhost' -- there are pre-built zone files for localhost, and for 1.0.0.127.in-addr.arpa and the equivalent inverse domain for IPv6-ish ::1 that come with the system and which you can just use without further ado. Cheers, Matthew - -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. Flat 3 7 Priory Courtyard PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate Kent, CT11 9PW, UK -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHzsJT3jDkPpsZ+VYRA9/oAJwPFc7OhS/5rl2RAVhqKGRP0ii/8wCbBf+m 0HqFbp1sTRR/wadko9k5BRQ= =ufcj -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: DNS Question
Hi Erik: I don't recall the how-to explaining the usage of this script. I too, just recently setup a DNS server for a couple domains. My recommendation is to familiarize yourself with the Administrators Reference Manual (ARM) on BIND's website: http://www.isc.org/index.pl?/sw/bind/arm93/ I found it more valuable than just following someone else's simple steps! David Alanis Quoting ?? [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hello, I am building the DNS Server,But I can't find the script /etc/namedb/make-localhost used in the document, So I can't go on now? Please tell me how to find the script,Thank you very much! Best Regards! Freebsd Lover:Erik ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dns question
* Jeff MacDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] [0157 12:57]: Not really a freebsdquestion specifically. My company uses ns.foo.com and ns1.foo.com for primay/secondary dns, about 200 domains rely on these. We want a new physical machine , in a different location, with a different IP to be our secondary dns. lets call it www.jerky.com ip = 244.233.222.211 imaginary.. Can I just make ns1.foo.com point to the new ip address, and update the registrar with the new ip for ns1.foo.com, and here's the kicker _ NOT have to worry about changing the secondary dns info for all 200 other domains _ Is the second NS server listed in the domain by hostname? If so, you'll be alright. freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- 'When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite.' -- Winston Churchill, On formal declarations of war Rasputin :: Jack of All Trades - Master of Nuns ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dns question
I think it depends upon the registrar. Of the 200 domains, they are probably registered across 2 or 3 registrars. Some ask for just the host name, while others ask for both hostname and IP. Jeff. On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 13:14:01 +, Dick Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Jeff MacDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] [0157 12:57]: Not really a freebsdquestion specifically. My company uses ns.foo.com and ns1.foo.com for primay/secondary dns, about 200 domains rely on these. We want a new physical machine , in a different location, with a different IP to be our secondary dns. lets call it www.jerky.com ip = 244.233.222.211 imaginary.. Can I just make ns1.foo.com point to the new ip address, and update the registrar with the new ip for ns1.foo.com, and here's the kicker _ NOT have to worry about changing the secondary dns info for all 200 other domains _ Is the second NS server listed in the domain by hostname? If so, you'll be alright. freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- 'When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite.' -- Winston Churchill, On formal declarations of war Rasputin :: Jack of All Trades - Master of Nuns -- Jeff MacDonald http://www.halifaxbudolife.ca ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: DNS question...
Hi, Have you try host command ? host your_server_name Maybe DNS takes a couple day for propagation. If this is the case try later in next 2-3 days. Cheers, --- Xpression [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi list, I'm getting a problem with my DNS, I'm running 4.7 + named, the config files are teorically well, but when I tried to get access from outside (of the network) to my ftp site, no returns records, when I tried with the real IP, everything's fine, any suggestion...??? ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! Messenger http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: DNS question...
On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 12:29:29PM -0400, Xpression wrote: Hi list: I want to change my DNS server/service, I still using named almost understand it so good, then I want to know is anyone have knowledge of any other DNS server that can be installed to serve DNS requests...thanks... djbdns is highly recommended - very easy to setup if you already understand the concept of zone files with named (although the syntax of djbdns 'data' files is different). djbdns is nice in that it separates the various tasks that named does into distinct modules - one for udp auth nameserver queries (tinydns), another for tcp (axfrdns), another for caching name server (dnscache). The best place to read is here: http://cr.yp.to/djbdns.html note that djbdns is in the ports under /usr/ports/net/djbdns iirc. Best Regards, Jez ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: DNS question
[please wrap you lines at 72 characters or so] aSe wrote: When a person does a dns lookup to the server and its not already cached, how does It find out the correct name server to use to find the ip? FreeBSD comes with a list of root DNS servers. These are master servers maintained by many different sources that have information on the top level domains. From this list, the DNS can figure out which root server to contact for .com or .net or .whatever. That server then directs your server to the specific DNS server that has the information you are asking for. This is oversimplified. If you have forwarders configured, then the forwarders check their cache first, before consulting the root servers. But the basic method is described there. -- Bill Moran Potential Technologies http://www.potentialtech.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body of the message
Re: DNS question
When a person does a dns lookup to the server and its not already cached, how does It find out the correct name server to use to find the ip? The DNS navigates the DNS namespace until it finds a positive or negative answer, or the until DNS's that should have the answer fail to respond. Len To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body of the message
RE: DNS question
Ahh okay, I understand that. Someone once told me the information is already downloaded in a list, so the server doesn't have to contact root all the time to get ns information. Is this not true anymore? bind9 has the root-servers hints zone in its binary, but will use an external hints zone if listed in named.conf. Len To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body of the message
