Two RFC2317 Questions

[phn at icke-reklam.ipsec.nu]

Barry Margolin <barmar at genuity.net> wrote:
> In article <a8vkt3$2bn at pub3.rc.vix.com>,  <phn at icke-reklam.ipsec.nu> wrote:
>>
>>Barry Finkel <b19141 at achilles.ctd.anl.gov> wrote:
>>> 2) swbell has included in their zone my four nameservers as well as
>>>    their two nameservers.   I have only my four nameservers in my zone.
>>>    As swbell has not assigned me the whole Class-C subnet of their
>>>    Class-B, they have the other half of that Class-B on their servers;
>>>    that is why they include their nameservers as well as mine.
>>>    My reading of the RFC leads me to believe that the zone should
>>>    not reference the 
>>
>>>         ns[12].swbell.net
>>
>>>    servers because they have delegated the 127 addresses to my servers.
>>>    What should be in the NS records?
>>
>>All 6, otherwize you wall have a couple of Lame delegations.

> No you won't.  A delegation is lame if the server isn't authoritative for
> the domain.  Leaving out NS records doesn't affect whether a server is
> authoritative.  As long as they've configured their servers as slaves for
> the subdomain, and Barry allows them to perform zone transfers, they'll be
> authoritative.

> Leaving out the NS records makes them "stealth secondaries".

Thanks for clearing this up, my fingers were faster then my brain :-)



> -- 
> 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.


-- 
Peter Håkanson         
        IPSec  Sverige      (At the Riverside of Gothenburg, home of Volvo)
           Sorry about my e-mail address, but i'm trying to keep spam out.
	   Remove "icke-reklam" and it works.