BIND 8 with DYNUPDATE capabilities

James Hall-Kenney James.Hall-Kenney at
Wed Mar 1 21:27:03 UTC 2000

Lucent QIP claims multimaster capability.

-----Original Message-----
From: Johnny Fribert Lauridsen [mailto:jlaurids at]
Sent: Thursday, 2 March 2000 09:07
To: Jim Reid
Cc: Jeff.Wilde at; comp-protocols-dns-bind at
Subject: Re: BIND 8 with DYNUPDATE capabilities 

well-known problem.  Is anyone other than Microsoft trying to do something
this problem with DNS.  Maybe it has not been such a hot problem up till
but with Win2000 and DDNS, it IS a problem with the single-primary....
Has Microsoft proposed multimaster DNS to IETF?

At 00:01 01/03/2000 +0000, Jim Reid wrote:
> >>>>> "Jeff" == Wilde, Jeff <Jeff.Wilde at> writes:
>     Jeff> I know that windows 2000's dns it is integrated into the
>     Jeff> active directory so that you can basically have two primary
>     Jeff> name servers and replications is always taking place because
>     Jeff> of the AD.  If one name server fails, the other name server
>     Jeff> will automaticaly keep on receiving dynamic updates and the
>     Jeff> replications will take place once the failed server comes
>     Jeff> back into service.  I currently have bind 8 set up as a
>     Jeff> master/slave configuration.  If my master was to fail, the
>     Jeff> dynamic updates wouldn't be handled by my slave the way I
>     Jeff> have it configured.  Is there a way to have either
>     Jeff> a) two primary servers that replicate zones to each other 
>No. A master name server - primary is OLD jargon - is the definitive
>source of DNS data for some zone. By definition it has nowhere else to
>get that information other than from the zone file (or equivalent)
>that it loads. If the server is master for some zone, it knows that
>by implication nothing else should be master for that zone too.
>     Jeff> b) have master/slave setup with the higher soa value being
>     Jeff> replicated to the other server.
>No. A name server that is master for some zone will NEVER EVER
>"replicate" that zone by retrieving a copy of the zone from some slave
>server. See the answer to your previous question.
>W2K has its own replication protocol for Active Directory and for
>ensuring that its multiple master name servers keep in sync with each
>other. IIUC this protocol is proprietary to Microsoft.
>     Jeff> My other question is, is there a timeout on the dynamic
>     Jeff> updates to cancel old stale data?
>No. How can the name server tell what data is old and what isn't? The
>responsibility for removing stale data from the zone rests with
>whatever put it there: a DHCP server, hostmaster, etc.

More information about the bind-users mailing list