DNS delegation based on both location and organization

[martinez_ja5 at tsm.es]

Actually I cannot allow even a single resolution miss (up to 1-2 second=
s of
added delay before retrying the second server on the list is too much f=
or a
service network). Load balancing would just be used to make sure a runn=
ing
DNS is used as a first option.




                                                                       =
                                                               =20
                                                                       =
                                                               =20
                             Danny Mayer                  Para:      Br=
ad Knowles <brad at stop.mail-abuse.org>                          =20
                             <mayer at gis.net>                 cc:     ma=
rtinez_ja5 at tsm.es, bind-users at isc.org                          =20
                                                         Asunto:     Re=
: DNS delegation based on both location and organization       =20
                                                                       =
                                                               =20
                                                                       =
                                                               =20
                                                                       =
                                                               =20
                             09/09/2005 06:30                          =
                                                               =20
                             Por favor, responda a                     =
                                                               =20
                             mayer                                     =
                                                               =20
                                                                       =
                                                               =20
                                                                       =
                                                               =20


                                                                       =
   =20
                Telef=F3nica M=F3viles Espa=F1a, S.A.                  =
         =20
                                                                       =
   =20




Brad Knowles wrote:
>
>> - I need local resolution and redundancy (I even need load balancers=

>>      for the quickest response time and highest availability)
>
You don't really need load balancers for DNS since the architecture of
DNS is by its nature distributed. Load Balancers for DNS are a waste of=

money and effort.

>            But keep in mind that you don't want to list too many
> authoritative servers (typically no more than four or five), because
> you don't want to cause the responses you hand out to exceed the
> 512-byte limitation of typical DNS responses via the UDP protocol.
> Trust me, you do *not* want to know what kind of weirdness tends to
> manifest itself when you start causing truncation, which results in
> DNS queries having to be re-tried with TCP, etc....
>

On this one I do trust you! It was not what you did but what was done t=
o
  the DNS Servers that caused the problems.

Danny



=