Fwd: Re: .TLD minimum number of nameservers rule

Kevin Darcy kcd at chrysler.com
Thu Dec 15 17:32:29 UTC 2011

To settle the question of "are 2 nameservers required by the RFCs?", I'm 
surprised you guys missed this text in RFC 1034, Section 4.1:

    A given zone will be available from several name servers to insure
    its availability in spite of host or communication link failure. By
    administrative fiat, we require every zone to be available on at
    least two servers, and many zones have more redundancy than that.

This is an "administrative fiat", you can't get much clearer than that.

             - Kevin
On 12/12/2011 6:20 PM, nudgemac at fastmail.fm wrote:
> Thanks all. Chris, Anand that's very useful to know, sorry Jeff and Philippe,
> your interesting suggestions wont work in this case.
> If I attack the problem from the other way down instead, the fact my current
> registra doesn't allow me to add PTR or DNAME records to my top level domain
> limits what exactly ? For instance, would this be a problem when implementing a
> wide area bonjour subdomain using my own local dns server for clients that are
> mobile (internal/external) ?
> I'm only allowed to add A NS MX CNAME TXT and SRV records via the web interface
> of my registra and I imagined that I'd need PTRs or a DNAME or some ther glue
> frustratingly unavailable. Having heard your response to my original question,
> I'm now desperately wishing that I got that wrong...
> On Dec 12 2011, Anand Buddhdev wrote:
>> I suspect that most, if not all registries will require you to provide
>> at least 2 name servers, because this is highly recommended in one of
>> the RFCs (forget which one now).
> This seems to go right back to RFC 882 (November 1983):
> | The domain must provide redundant (i.e., two or more) name servers
> | to provide the name to address resolution service.  These name
> | servers must be accessible from outside the domain (as well as
> | inside) and must resolve names for at least all the hosts in the
> | domain.
> RFC 1035 (November 1987) just mentions this in section 2.1 "Overview":
> | Different parts of the domain space are stored in different name
> | servers, although a particular data item will be stored redundantly
> | in two or more name servers.
> while RFC 2182 (July 1997), which I suspect is the one Anand had in
> mind, says in section 5 "How many secondaries?":
> | The DNS specification and domain name registration rules require at
> | least two servers for every zone.
> before going on to recommend more than two in most cases.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/attachments/20111215/a3945e6c/attachment.html>

More information about the bind-users mailing list