bind selective delegation, is it possible?

Zachary Denison zacharydenison at
Wed Mar 28 13:05:48 UTC 2007

Because there are more than 1 load balancer, so there is not 1 vip to
point to.  The functionality I want is:    IN  NS    IN  NS    IN  NS            IN  NS            IN  NS            IN  NS            IN  MX 0

where just the A record can be served by the load balancer but the MX
by the nameserver above.    I have tried the above, and a CNAME to no
avail.   There must be some way to get this functionality - I can
think of loads of websites where they load balance on the domain
without the wwws and they still get mail to the same main domain.
Maybe I am not thinking about it the right way - but there must be
some way to accomplish this end goal.

On 3/28/07, Wael Shahin <wael.shahin at> wrote:
> Hello,
> I have one silly question if i may, why do you need your DNS servers behind
> the load balancer?
> can't you have your DNS to be autheritative and pointing the www record or
> the A record you want to the vip? or did i get that all wrong?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Zachary Denison" <zacharydenison at>
> To: <bind-users at>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 2:53 AM
> Subject: bind selective delegation, is it possible?
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am trying to solve a DNS problem.   I am trying to delegate my
> > to another nameserver for the A record  but I still want
> > the MX record to be served by the original server.  The reason for
> > this is that I have load balancers and they expect to be delegated the
> > NS authority for the domain of the website (so I have delegated
> > with no problem)  Now the problem I am having is that I
> > also want to be able to load balance  since it is
> > quite common not to use the wwws nowadays.  The nameserver
> > functionality on these loadbalancers is primitive and they only
> > support A records.  If I put in an NS record on the master dns server
> > and delegate to my load balancers, my email breaks because
> > the DNS engines on the load balancers dont serve up MX records, only A
> > records, but the delegation is relinquishing authority from the master
> > server.  If I use a CNAME, its the same thing, it delegates the entire
> > domain and the master server becomes no longer authoritative for the
> > MX record.  Is there a way I can delegate to my load
> > balancer for A records only but retain authority for the MX records?
> > Or is there some other better way to accomplish this?
> >
> > Thank you very much.
> >
> > Zach
> >
> >

More information about the bind-users mailing list