Domain Not Resolving

Reindl Harald h.reindl at
Tue Nov 21 17:30:46 UTC 2017

Am 21.11.2017 um 18:05 schrieb Ron Wingfield:
> . . .well, I never expected to get "flamed" as by GED, "/As a general 
> observation, not knowing what you're doing is dangerous
> on the Internet.  Please take some time out of your undoubtedly busy 
> life to try to ensure that you aren't a menace to the rest of us.  A
> good start might be to read the famous DNS and BIND/."

what else did you expect by a configuration plain wrong in that many 

> Actually I have two copies of Cricket Liu's book, both 4th and 5th 
> edition.  (4th ed. autographed.) are the required docs

> Regardless, the reason for two name servers pointing to the same IP 
> address is because the domain registrar requires two designated name 
> servers

because of and he 
should not have allowed this setup at all because "Minimum number of 
name servers - There must be at least two NS records listed in a 
delegation, and the hosts must not resolve to the same IP address"

and the next paragraph makes it clear that even a second machine in the 
same subnet is not enough for obvious reasons

Network diversity
The name servers must be in at least two topologically separate 
networks. A network is defined as an origin autonomous system in the BGP 
routing table. The requirement is assessed through inspection of views 
of the BGP routing table

> so since we only have the one platform running DNS with BIND 
> Version: 9.10.2 Perhaps in the future a second installation may be 
> incorporated.

then you can't host your own DNS severS - it's that easy

> Regardless this system has worked well since 2002.  Only as of 3 NOV 
> 2017 has it started failing
by luck

More information about the bind-users mailing list