Re: Fwd: Re: .TLD minimum number of nameservers rule

2011-12-15 Thread Kevin Darcy
To settle the question of are 2 nameservers required by the RFCs?, I'm surprised you guys missed this text in RFC 1034, Section 4.1: A given zone will be available from several name servers to insure its availability in spite of host or communication link failure. By administrative

Re: Fwd: Re: .TLD minimum number of nameservers rule

2011-12-15 Thread Chris Thompson
On Dec 15 2011, Kevin Darcy wrote: To settle the question of are 2 nameservers required by the RFCs?, I'm surprised you guys missed this text in RFC 1034, Section 4.1: A given zone will be available from several name servers to insure its availability in spite of host or communication

Re: Re: .TLD minimum number of nameservers rule

2011-12-13 Thread nudgemac
What IS the problem, exactly? You're describing two things that doesn't seem to be related: number of NS for a zone, and PTR/DNAME records. My appologies if in an attempt to be succint, I failed to be clear. If you don't own an IP address, then usually you don't need to bother about PTR

Re: Re: .TLD minimum number of nameservers rule

2011-12-13 Thread Fajar A. Nugraha
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 3:53 PM, nudge...@fastmail.fm wrote: For instance, would this be a problem when implementing a wide area bonjour subdomain using my own local dns server for clients that are mobile (internal/external) ? Bonjour should work even without a DNS server. Reminds me

Re: .TLD minimum number of nameservers rule

2011-12-13 Thread Sten Carlsen
It does not seem clear to me if you mix the internal network and the external network with regards to the 2 server requirement. Everything inside your own NAT is your own responsibility - you can use any number of DNS servers you like - 0, 1, 10, n. For the rest of the world to see, two servers

RE: Re: .TLD minimum number of nameservers rule

2011-12-13 Thread Timothe Litt
. - This communication may not represent my employer's views, if any, on the matters discussed. -Original Message- From: nudge...@fastmail.fm [mailto:nudge...@fastmail.fm] Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 03:54 To: Fajar A. Nugraha Cc: bind-us...@isc.org Subject: Re: Re: .TLD minimum

RE: .TLD minimum number of nameservers rule

2011-12-12 Thread Lightner, Jeff
. -Original Message- From: bind-users-bounces+jlightner=water@lists.isc.org [mailto:bind-users-bounces+jlightner=water@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of Anand Buddhdev Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 9:32 AM To: nudge...@fastmail.fm Cc: bind-us...@isc.org Subject: Re: .TLD minimum number

Re: .TLD minimum number of nameservers rule

2011-12-12 Thread Chris Thompson
On Dec 12 2011, Anand Buddhdev wrote: I suspect that most, if not all registries will require you to provide at least 2 name servers, because this is highly recommended in one of the RFCs (forget which one now). This seems to go right back to RFC 882 (November 1983): | The domain must

Fwd: Re: .TLD minimum number of nameservers rule

2011-12-12 Thread nudgemac
Thanks all. Chris, Anand that's very useful to know, sorry Jeff and Philippe, your interesting suggestions wont work in this case. If I attack the problem from the other way down instead, the fact my current registra doesn't allow me to add PTR or DNAME records to my top level domain limits what

Re: Re: .TLD minimum number of nameservers rule

2011-12-12 Thread Fajar A. Nugraha
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 6:20 AM, nudge...@fastmail.fm wrote: Thanks all. Chris, Anand that's very useful to know, sorry Jeff and Philippe, your interesting suggestions wont work in this case. If I attack the problem from the other way down instead, the fact my current registra doesn't allow