two primary's

Chris Buxton cbuxton at
Wed Mar 5 16:09:47 UTC 2008

On Mar 5, 2008, at 3:06 AM, Niall O'Reilly wrote:
> 	The terms 'primary' and 'secondary' (or better, 'fallback', since
> 	there may even be more than two) are still useful when describing
> 	the set of resolver servers which provide name resolution for each
> 	client (running only a stub resolver) _within a network_.  IMHO,
> 	this is the only sensible use of these terms.

Actually, outside of BIND's nomenclature, the correct term for the  
authoritative server that gets its zone entirely from local data,  
rather than from another authoritative server, is "primary master". A  
slave gets its data from one or more master servers, but those master  
servers could themselves be slaves of one or more other masters. There  
is (typically) only one primary master in a normal zone-transfer-based  
replication scheme.

> The answer in this
> 	case is 'NO', unless local anycast or a clever stub resolver is in
> 	use: only one can be first in the list (/etc/resolv.conf or  
> whatever).

But the ordering can be dynamically changed by the stub resolver,  
depending on version.

Chris Buxton
Professional Services
Men & Mice
Address: Noatun 17, IS-105, Reykjavik, Iceland
Phone:   +354 412 1500
Email:   cbuxton at

Men & Mice
We bring control and flexibility to network management

This e-mail and its attachments may contain confidential and  
privileged information only intended for the person or entity to which  
it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended  
recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination,  
distribution or copy of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you  
have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by  
reply e-mail and immediately delete this message and all its attachment.

More information about the bind-users mailing list