Redundant servers ???

Barry Margolin barmar at bbnplanet.com
Mon Aug 23 14:26:50 UTC 1999


In article <14732.935221524 at kludge.mpn.cp.philips.com>,
Jim Reid  <jim at mpn.cp.philips.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "Barry" == Barry Margolin <barmar at bbnplanet.com> writes:
>
>    Barry> In article <199908202006.QAA07011 at www.fsproduce.com>, Bennett
>Samowich <brs at fsproduce.com> wrote:
>    >> I read somewhere, I can't remember where, about creating two
>    >> primary DNS server and using rsync to keep them identical.
>    >> 
>    >> Is this more reliable than having one server pass the
>    >> information {master|slave} to the other.
>
>    Barry> I don't see why this would be more reliable.  It's just a
>    Barry> different way to keep the servers in sync.
>
>    Barry> It means you'll have to do extra work to get it going.  DNS
>    Barry> already provides automatic synchronization via zone
>    Barry> transfers, periodic refreshes and the NOTIFY protocol, and
>    Barry> you'll need to replicate that functionality in your rsync
>    Barry> mechanism.
>
>In fact it's worse than that. You have to go through all sorts of
>contortions to try to switch *off* those mechanisms if you're using
>something like rsync to keep the server contents sychronised. For
>instance primary server #1 won't be too happy at getting a NOTIFY from
>primary server #2 when it loads a new copy of the zone.

It will just ignore it, perhaps logging a warning.  No big deal.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar at bbnplanet.com
GTE Internetworking, Powered by BBN, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.


More information about the bind-users mailing list