slave on per-zone basis only?

Kevin Darcy kcd at
Wed Feb 20 21:16:37 UTC 2002

WebReactor Networks wrote:

> Matt asked:
> >I have a general question about the configuration of
> >slave nameservers.  Does a slave have to have an entry
> >for every zone that a master serves?
> Danny replied:
> >No.
> Sorry... in my earlier post I made the assumption that by "slave" you meant "a slave for all zones served by the master", based on the context of your question.  Danny is correct.
> Matt asked:
> >Does an entry such as this need to added for *every* domain
> >that this server is a slave for?
> Danny replied:
> > No.  A slave zone only needs to be set up for those domains
> > that have been delegated to it
> On the contrary, a server can be a slave for any zone.  I can set up a slave server for the zone "" if they haven't secured their zone transfers

Hence the term "stealth slave".

> I have used this method on internal networks when I want to avoid traversing a WAN link for every query, but don't require quick updates via NOTIFY.

You can have NOTIFY for stealth slaves, if you want. That's what "also-notify" is for.

Note that the decision of whether to be a stealth slave or a caching/forwarding/stub'ing server, for any given zone, can be a complex one. You have to take into consideration your query patterns, the speed at which you want changes to the zone to propagate, how big the zone is, how often it changes, whether IXFR is in use, etc. to get the best tradeoff between redundancy,
immediacy, query performance and resource usage (the resources of both the network and the servers involved should be taken into account).

                                                                                                                        - Kevin

More information about the bind-users mailing list