BIND View Option

Kevin Darcy kcd at
Thu Nov 11 18:41:47 UTC 2010

On 11/11/2010 1:22 PM, J. Thomsen wrote:
>>  From a nameserver implementation and maintenance perspective, it's even
>> simpler for the data to already be present in the first view that
>> matches. Why complicate things more than that?
> Because there is a need for it especially in large installations with a large number of
> zones.
>> Different people have
>> different definitions of what "not found" means, so you're never going
>> to get a solid consensus on when searches should stop, and when they
>> should keep on going to the next view.
> At the zone level, which is what we need, there cannot be any doubt.
Yes, but the fallacy there is that records and zones are somehow 
inseparable. You can't know what the closest-enclosing-zone for a given 
QNAME is, until you search for that particular RRset within the 
namespace hierarchy. And in the course of that search, one may encounter 
CNAMEs, DNAMEs, wildcards, referrals, etc. before you can even determine 
what zone is ultimately involved.

Just because you can't see the can of worms doesn't mean it isn't there.

                 - Kevin

More information about the bind-users mailing list