BIND 9 Newbie

Kevin Darcy kcd at daimlerchrysler.com
Wed Dec 19 03:11:59 UTC 2001


nuk wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I have been running Linux for a while now, but decided that it is time
> to finally set up DNS for my growing little home LAN.  I am using Red
> Hat 7.2, which comes w/ bind v9.1.3 out of the box, which while not the
> latest and greatest, should work for what I need (I think) for setting
> up and maintaining services on my network.
>
> I'm not adverse to reading documentation, but at this point I'm not sure
> if the ARM is as basic as I need.  I have found a lot of other docs, but
> they almost all deal w/ bind v8.  The rest deal w/ bind v4.
>
> What I need to know at this point is this:  for setting up a basic
> nameserver for a home LAN, using private class 'C' addresses and an
> imaginary domain name i.e. not one registered on the Internet, and
> hidden behind a masquerading firewall, how much difference is there btwn
> setting up the zone files for forward and reverse mapping for a small
> (6-10 hosts) LAN?  Nothing that fancy here, no SMP, DNSSEC, slaves, etc.
> Just a lone little server doing DNS among other things.

Most things should be the same, just slightly different in scale. However,
one big question to ask is: what names are the nameserver going to be
expected to resolve? If you set up your home LAN for resolving both
internal and Internet names (with the external names  being resolved _by_
or _through_ your firewall), yet you set up the business LAN as a
self-contained "internal root", then there will be significant differences
in configuration. In the internal-root scenario, for instance, it might
make most sense to just throw everything into one root zone, but in the
Internet-resolving scenario, that's not really an option, so you're stuck
defining at least 2 zones (1 forward and 1 reverse).


- Kevin





More information about the bind-users mailing list