Philip wrote:
> > My "secondary" is simply imaginary. Whereas my primary is > > "ns1.example.com", my secondary is "ns2.example.com". I > > only enter new > > records one time in my DNS console on my IIS 5 server. Whenever I > > register a new domain, I just stick "ns2.example.com" in > > the required > > 2nd field because Registrars require 2 DNS server names, > > regardless of whether the second one exists or not. Guy replied: > Do you also add imaginary secondary MX records for fake > redundancy/failover? No. In the MS DNS console, I only enter one MX record for those domains that have/need email access, and that MX record points to mail.mymailserver.com > I'm sorry to come across as being blunt but what I get, following this > thread, is that you believe that you must host DNS on one of > your servers > because you want complete control over its configuration and > not bother your > ISP every time you wish to change something in DNS. Initially I muddled through how to handle DNS console records by asking questions at www.experts-exchange.com What little tips I got seemed to work. I would not have started this thread if it weren't for the fact that I sometimes get timeouts on Uunet's DNS servers via NSLOOKUP and bounced email from Imail Server stating "Host unknown: [EMAIL PROTECTED]" > Scott, Rod, Sandy, and other very knowledgeable and > experienced members of > this Forum have taken the time to explain in detail Which I am thankful for, indeed... > you have regarding this topic. Please try to forget how you > think DNS works and go with their advice. At this point, their advice isn't clear, since we have been talking about Imail versus web hosting, authoritative vs. non-authoritative. I am not confident that they know how my server is configured, and therefore their advice may be based on false assumptions. Turning off DNS service on my web server is not something I should be taking lightly. > Apparently, you still believe that no one will > be able to > reach your Web and/or mail server if you are not running DNS > locally, which is simply not true. You stated that I don't have to run DNS service on my web server for my own domains, but the only other advice I have been given is simply to let someone else's server run it. But that is too general for me to act upon. That's like giving custody of my 3 year old son to somebody else. Yes, it could be done, but it's not something I treat lightly or make a decision on based upon general advice. > If you are dissatisfied with your ISP's > DNS, I'd suggest > switching to a different ISP rather than attempting to set up > DNS locally (and adding bogus nameserver entries). For web hosting, my ISP (who provides the T1 and rackspace) works great. It's just the occasional "Host unknown" and name server time outs that I'm unhappy with. Reclaiming my server (which is only 12 miles away) and shipping it to another company halfway across the USA is not something I wish to consider. The downtime would be unthinkable. > Sorry for the tone, Philip. I just meant to convey the fact that you > benefitted from expert advice and answers and, yet, you seem > to not take it > seriously but rather want to pursue your own (erroneous) course. I think you think that I am rejecting all advice given to me. That is incorrect. I simply do not understand all the advice, and I question whether the advice givers understand my situation fully. Philip To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
