Since the topic this month is DNS servers, I though I might get a discussion going in advance on the long time rule of thumb/requirement to have two or more DNS servers.
I have never understood that for this reason alone. If you only have one real server, who cares how many DNS servers you have. If that one server is down/offline/unavailable, what good does multiple DNS servers do anyone? Not to mention one of the simplest, most straight forward, and reliable server services I have ever setup or worked with is DNS. It has never made sense to me why you need two DNS servers, ideally on separate networks. Now I do understand the importance of DNS in the general scope of things. But again, if your servers are down, what good does a bunch of DNS servers do you? Case in point, firebirdsql.org seems to be down atm. But they have a whole bunch of DNS servers (~6) doing name to IP translation. Which considering you can't get anything by hitting the single IP address all 6 name servers serve up. Almost moot that you get an IP at all from DNS. If servers are down, DNS being up is moot, and seems like its more important to have multiple servers in general, not just DNS. But its not necessarily common practice to duplicate and make everything redundant. Very few if any sites will say ask for more than one IP address or domain name for any service, like web, email, etc. But when it comes to name servers, most always you are entering in two or more. -- William L. Thomson Jr. Obsidian-Studios, Inc. http://www.obsidian-studios.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- Archive http://marc.info/?l=jaxlug-list&r=1&w=2 RSS Feed http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/maillist.xml Unsubscribe [email protected]
