Breaking up a class for delegation
Niall.oReilly at ucd.ie
Mon Sep 24 22:58:24 UTC 2007
On 24 Sep 2007, at 20:10, Bischof, Ralph F. (MSFC-NNM04AA02C)[SAIC]
> My thought is that instead of having a single delegation to the
> two nameservers as I do now, I will have to take the single delegation
> (164.129.in-addr.arpa) and give it 256 entries. The first 128 entries
> would be delegations to at least two nameservers for the original
> and the second set of 128 entries to at least two nameservers for the
> new project. Then, each of the two delegatees (is that a word?) would
> need to also build up 128 zone files as they saw fit.
> Is there another way? If not, I am good with that idea. I just
> wanted to make sure that I have not missed something that has come out
There is another way, using DNAME, out since quite a while, but
still less well known than it deserves.
You mention IVV. Let's suppose the other Centre is called JWW,
and that the IVV folks remain responsible for the delegation of
the 164.129.in-addr.arpa zone.
If the IVV folks add the following records to this zone, the JWW
people can undertake responsibility for a new zone,
jww IN NS ns1.jww.nasa.gov.
IN NS ns2.jww.nasa.gov.
IN NS nasans4.nasa.gov.
128 IN DNAME 128.jww
129 IN DNAME 129.jww
It looks like $GENERATE would be useful here.
The JWW folks then have to place their PTR records in the (single)
This involves once-off light effort from IVV, and needs no changes
to existing PTR data for the /24-blocks (0-127) which they plan to
continue to use.
An extension of this scheme, involving more effort for both IVV and
some 'more central part' of the organization, could be used if
operational dependency of JWW on IVV were not acceptable, and a
suitable 'more central part' were agreed. That would be a political
More information about the bind-users