In message <50184fa8.1070...@mtcc.com>, Michael Thomas writes: > On 07/31/2012 01:29 PM, Michael Richardson wrote: > >>>>>> "Ted" == Ted Lemon <mel...@fugue.com> writes: > > Ted> You secondary a zone so that the contents of the zone will be > > Ted> there when a query happens, but why would a query happen if the > > Ted> CPE device isn't reachable? What would trigger that query? > > Ted> So I think you can get away with _not_ secondarying the zone. > > Ted> But if you do want to secondary it, why would the ISP be > > Ted> responsible for that? Presumably the customer is pretty > > Ted> savvy; a secondary for their reverse tree would just be another > > Ted> service they'd want to buy or set up, and the ISP could wash > > Ted> their hands of it or sell it, whichever they chose. > > > > My suggestion is that the ISP secondary the zone from the CPE, but > > actually advertise only their server in the NS delegation. (The CPE > > remains a stealth primary) > > Do you mean (in bind parlance at least) the CPE is the master, and the > ISP is the slave even though it's authoritative?
All listed nameservers for a zone are presumed to be authoritative for the zone. slave/master (primary/secondary) are only relevent w.r.t. the zone transfer graph between these servers and where update requests are forwarded to. > Mike > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > homenet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
