delegation failure

Stephane Bortzmeyer bortzmeyer at
Tue Jan 20 16:30:38 UTC 2009

On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 04:14:01PM +0000,
 Lars Hecking <lhecking at> wrote 
 a message of 87 lines which said:

>  This host is set up as a master for 172.30/16. It delegates 172.30
>  to a subdomain (A record for is present
>  elsewhere).

Hold on! There is already a contradiction. It is supposed to be an
authoritative name server (a master is a special case of an
authoritative name server) but it delegates to a different
machine. You cannot have both. Either is authoritative
for or it is not.
>  db.172.30:
>  @ IN SOA root. 2009012001 10800 3600 604800 300
>    IN NS

I do not see a delegation of
>  Now, the setup of
>  bind 9.4.2-P2
>  This host is set up as a master for 172.30/16 

Now, you have *two* masters for Again, it is a
contradiction (unless the two masters get their data from an external
source such as a DBMS but it does not appear to be the case here).

>  Why is the delegation chain not working? Is it a conflict for having both
>  the top level and as master for 172.30?

Partly. You can have only one master. But you may have several
authoritative name servers for one zone (actually, this is
>  Would it be better to use stubs to delegate 172.30 down from the
>  top level?


>  Do I need to delegate all 255 /24 subnets explicitly at the top
>  level server?

All those you use, yes.

>  I think I'm missing something fundamental here ...

IMHO, you need to go back to the drawing board and, before writing
named.conf and zone files, deciding on a general architecture.

Who will be the master for
Who will be authoritative for
Who will be the master for
Who will be authoritative for

More information about the bind-users mailing list