Configuring stub zones

[matthew.harding at hrdc-drhc.gc.ca]

Yes, this works fine and is a much more elegant scenario. I don't know why I 
was thinking stub zones.

When would type stub zones be appropriate?

Thanks,
Matthew
---------- Original Text ----------

From: "Barry Margolin" <barmar at genuity.net>, on 09/04/2001 2:35 PM:

In article <9n35b5$6jh at pub3.rc.vix.com>,
 <matthew.harding at hrdc-drhc.gc.ca> wrote:
>
>Hello, I had a question about stub zones and their functionality.
>
>I have authority for lab.companyname.com, and I have a Solaris 2.6 server 
>running 9.0 (or 8.x, doesn't bother me). What I would like to do is delegate 
>away just a single IP to another hardware load balancer, i.e. 
>www.lab.companyname.com. The other server responds with a different IP each 
>time, but is authoritative ONLY for that IP (i.e. there will never be other 
>IPs or subdomains in this www subdomain).
>
>Is the correct way to do this using stub zones for that particular address 
>only? If so, what is the correct syntax? I have tried to get stub zones 
>working but without a clear example I don't know if I am achieving my goal.

No, you should just use a delegation record:

www IN NS loadbalancer.companyname.com.

>If I do this for multiple instances (i.e. www.otherzone.companyname.com, 
>www.yetanotherzone.companyname.com), are there performance/scalability issues?

Most of these load balancers can handle many domains without any
performance problems.  DNS is a pretty lightweight protocol.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar at genuity.net
Genuity, Woburn, 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.