Forward vs Authoritative traffic

[Nex6|Bill]

5 sec TTL, with a lot of  load balancer based rules. on a lot of servers…..



On Nov 7, 2014, at 1:31 PM, Chris Buxton <clists at buxtonfamily.us> wrote:

> On Nov 7, 2014, at 1:29 PM, Nex6|Bill <n6ghost at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> 
>> our parent org, owns the  parent zone, and this zone is delegated from there to a load balancer onsite. which is authoritative.  but, the query path for a normal query crosses the internet gateway because thats where the parent
>> is. ( very short TTL ).
>> 
>> any internet connection issue causes issues, so i am going to put a forward zone directly from my NS to the load balancer which is auth for the zone. that way, if the internet gateway is down or has issues the application will still function.
> 
> I suspect a static-stub zone is more what you want, but yes, that sounds like it should work.
> 
> Chris
> 
>> On Nov 7, 2014, at 1:04 PM, Chris Buxton <clists at buxtonfamily.us> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Nov 7, 2014, at 11:35 AM, Nex6|Bill <n6ghost at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I am going to be adding a type forward zone for an important zone.  how can i test that the forward is working correctly? if i do a dig against the NS the record will return no matter if its auth or fwd zone. 
>>> 
>>> Will your server be receiving recursive or iterative queries (rd=1 or rd=0) for the zone? Forwarding zones like this don't work for iterative queries.
>>> 
>>> Chris
>> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/attachments/20141107/1e9f67c5/attachment.bin>