use named.ca or forwarder statement?

[phn at icke-reklam.ipsec.nu]

VM <vickun at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Is it okay to not use any "forwarder" statement, but just stick in the
> "named.ca" file the next DNS to query for resolution information?

> We are setting up a tiered structure of DNS's.

> We have a domain, let's say, "company.com".  We have hosts that are
> either available only internally, or available both internally and
> externally.

> That means some hosts will only have a "10.x.x.x" IP address, while
> others will have both a "10.x.x.x" IP address, as well as a real world
> IP address like "64.x.x.x".

> This means I will have an intranet DNS that resolves "company.com"
> hostnames with the "10.x.x.x" IP addresses, as well as an internet DNS
> that resolves "64.x.x.x" IP addresses.

> Question 1:
> In my intranet DNS's "named.ca" file, is it okay to just put my
> internet DNS as the sole entry?

> Question 2:
> Is the "forwarder" statement just a convenient way of accessing DNS
> information quickly for the other domains you normally look for?  Like
> for example if I'm at a sporting goods company, should I stick in
> espn.com's DNS servers into my "forwarder" statement?


I suggest you get a copy of "Managing DNS and BIND" from o'reilly
( currently 4-th edition) 

Your questions are relevant, however i think you might find them
answered after reading this book, and the chapter about "split-dns"
especially.

Welcome back with more questions !

-- 
Peter Håkanson         
        IPSec  Sverige      ( At Gothenburg Riverside )
           Sorry about my e-mail address, but i'm trying to keep spam out,
	   remove "icke-reklam" if you feel for mailing me. Thanx.