Secondary Server

[Kevin Darcy]

For a limited, i.e. internal root namespace, a more palatable alternative might
be to run a script periodically on the slaves which just searches for new zones
to slave and obsolete ones to stop slaving. This is what we do. This way, I
don't have to set up any trust relationships between master and slaves, or run
any cron jobs on the master constantly checking files to see if anything has
changed.

For larger namespaces, e.g. the Internet, this approach is not practical, but
I still think a somewhat modified version might be feasible: have something on
the slaves which watches the logs for incoming NOTIFY messages, and then
auto-slaves the NOTIFY'ed zones, subject to ACL's, delegation-checks, etc.. You
could also have a separate job running on the slaves to check delegations so
that it knows when to stop slaving a zone.

As for kill -HUP'ing named, it would probably be less disruptive to do a "ndc
reconfig" followed by any necessary "ndc reload <zone>" commands, wouldn't
it? Of course, if you're constantly overlaying your slaves' /etc/named.conf
files with *arbitrary* contents, I guess that's not really an option...


- Kevin

Abraham Ingersoll wrote:

> If you really don't want to ever have to edit named.conf and kill -HUP
> named on your secondaries (and don't feel like waiting on ISC to
> 'augment' the protocol), just write a shell script to rsync or scp or
> rdist /etc/named.conf and /var/named/* to secondaries as needed.
>
> I may be mistaken, but I bet a lot of folks do this and run their
> "secondary" nameservers standalone with their own local copy of
> required zone data.
>
> Abe
>
>  On Wed, 3 May 2000, Joseph S D Yao wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 16, 2000 at 12:39:03AM +0100, Johan Fredrik Vhman wrote:
> > ...
> > > I'm a little disapointet that there is no such feature in bind ?
> > > Woudn't it be nice if a future version of bind Bind supported automaticly
> > > polling of all domain names on secondary server ?   This would lower the
> > > amount of administration a scondary nameserver requiers....
> >
> > It would have to read minds to do so.
> >
> > I have name servers a, b, and c.  I have - for legitimate reasons - one
> > domain whose master is a and whose slave is b, and another whose master
> > is a and whose slave is c.  I have a third whose master is c and whose
> > slaves are a and b.
> >
> > I now install a new zone.  If I make its master a, which machines
> > should be slaves?  How about if the master is b?  What if it's c?
> >
> > Wrong.  I intended to have "d" slave to this one.  ;-)  [Unfair, there
> > is no d, and I made that one up.  But there could be!]
> >
> >