Views are like any advanced technology or technique in IT: if understood and used properly, they can be a big benefit; poorly understood and/or implemented, they can create a huge, unsupportable mess.

I try to keep the number of views to a minimum, but given the complexity I have to deal with, some of my named.conf's have as many as 7 views (most of which are "temporary", since we're always in the middle of migrating and/or sundowning something or another).

For some of us, virtual instances cost visible bucks from our service provider, but views cost only extra support time, which is lumped in with a bunch of other support costs, and is thus not "visible". Sometimes it matters -- to beancounters -- whether something is broken out as a line item or not...

                                - Kevin

On 1/2/2014 10:37 AM, Alan Clegg wrote:
On Jan 2, 2014, at 9:19 AM, wbr...@e1b.org wrote:

Use views
Views +1
When were views added to BIND?  We started using using multiple servers in
BIND 4, and I don't recall views being available back then, but I didn't
configure the servers, just maintained the zones.

We're still using multiple servers for internal vs. external resolution.
Views have been in bind "for all recent history".

I've watched this thread and have been biting my tongue as long as I could.

I'm a proponent of separating servers and NOT using views, as any of you that 
have taken a class that I've taught will attest.

I've seen too many problems over the years that have been caused by incorrect 
maintenance of both data feeding the views and goofs in the mechanisms making 
sure that the correct view is made available to the correct slave servers (and 
clients).

With today's hardware (virtualization, etc) it's not very expensive to build 
out new servers.  Separate the services and you remove lots of the little 
prickly points that will cause you pain as the complexity of your 
infrastructure grows (and as you hand off to the 'next generation' of 
maintainers).

I'm actually more a proponent of creating an architecture that doesn't NEED 
differentiated data, but there aren't a lot of places implementing DNS / naming 
structures on green-fields these days.

AlanC


_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe 
from this list

bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe 
from this list

bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

Reply via email to