order of nameserver upgrade?
Mark_Andrews at isc.org
Mon Feb 6 21:49:22 UTC 2006
> Is there any rule of thumb for the order in which master and
> slave nameservers are upgraded/modified? Slave first, master
> first, or something else? Is it worth the trouble to set up
> a host as both slave and master, selected via choice of named.conf
> on startup?
> Only two servers are involved, with only two routeable IP
> addresses. The replacement is motivated by hardware age,
> not load. Uptime is nice, but few will notice outages 8-)
> As you may surmise, this is an educational project.
> Albitz and Liu discuss _adding_ servers, but I found little
> comment on the best way to replace them.
> Thanks for reading and any counsel.
> bob prohaska
It really doesn't matter. Newer versions are less tolerent
of configuration errors.
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews at isc.org
More information about the bind-users