recursion or no-recursion?

f.renzetti at f.renzetti at
Mon Dec 13 11:08:31 UTC 2004

Yes, I have full control on B and C, but "stub" is not my best solution
because (this is what I know) it is a Bind-specific implementation and B and
C are not Bind-Based...
I thought to implement another type of configuration based on a per-domain =
forward zone, so:
on DNS B I think to configure a forward-zone for domain C ( domain C -> =
forwarders {C;}; )
on DNS C I think to configure a forward-zone for domain B ( domain B -> =
forwarders {B;}; )
and let A do like a forwarders for all other domain.
What do you think about this configuration?
Thanks again.

Renzetti Federico

System/Network Administrator
RedHat Ce= rtified Engineer

Fabaris srl
via Goffredo Mameli, 90
02047 Pog= gio Mirteto (RI)
Tel. 076522181
Fax 0765410100[1]

-----bind-users-bounce at wrote: -----

To: bind-users at
F= rom: Kevin Darcy <kcd at>
Sent by: bind-users-bou= nce at
Date: 10/12/2004 18.59
Subject: Re: recursion or no-recur= sion?

Federico Renzetti wrote:
>Hi all,
>this is my first mail to this ml and I'm sorry but= I don't know if
>argument was already treated in the past.= 
>I have a DNS that is authoritative for the domain "" (DN=
>with delegation for internal subtree ""= (DNS =3D3D B)
>"" (DNS =3D3D C) .
>DNS= B and C use my DNS (A) as forwarder because it is the only who
could=3D20>reach internet so the problem is:
>could I allow recursion (in= A) for B and C only for addresses outside=3D20
>domain ""= and subtree?
>I would like to return ns delegation to B/C for subtre= e of domain=3D20
>"" but I would like to use recursion to = resolve internet=3D20
>Sorry for my english and th= anks in advance
I can't think of any way to accomplish this. all= ow-recursion can't be 
set selectively. If you have any administrative c= ontrol over B and C, 
why not just define the subzones as stub zones on = those servers?

                                            - Kevin


--- Links ---
   1 3D"http=

More information about the bind-users mailing list