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