On 26/07/2019 17:35, Nataraj wrote:
If you administer the secondary slave servers, there is no reason not to
use a very large number, 30 days or more for the SOA expiration. Only
reason to use a lower number would be if you don't have control over the
slave servers and don't want to have old
On Jul 25, 2019, at 5:42 PM, Nataraj wrote:
>
> On 7/25/19 4:31 PM, Nataraj wrote:
>> It doesn't really help those clients I can not run name servers on,
>> though.
>
> Another alternative is to look at the multicast dns (mdns) protocol.
That’s for allowing a device to self-advertise its own
On 7/26/19 6:52 AM, Giles Coochey wrote:
>
> On 26/07/2019 14:45, Leroy Tennison wrote:
>> This brings up one of the caveats for (at least ISC) DNS, if the
>> master goes down the slaves will take over for a time but eventually
>> will stop serving for the domains of the master if it remains down
On 26/07/2019 14:45, Leroy Tennison wrote:
This brings up one of the caveats for (at least ISC) DNS, if the master goes
down the slaves will take over for a time but eventually will stop serving for
the domains of the master if it remains down too long. If my (sometimes
faulty) memory
please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete all
copies of the message.
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [CentOS] how to increase DNS reliability?
On 7/25/19 1:10 PM, hw wrote:
>>
>> Configure all dns servers as primary slaves (plus 1 primary master) for
>> your own domains.
On 7/25/19 4:31 PM, Nataraj wrote:
> It doesn't really help those clients I can not run name servers on,
> though.
Another alternative is to look at the multicast dns (mdns) protocol. I
have no experience with it, so I can't say very much, but I know it
exists. I'm pretty sure it's inplemented
On 7/25/19 1:10 PM, hw wrote:
>>
>> Configure all dns servers as primary slaves (plus 1 primary master) for
>> your own domains. I have never seen problems with resolution of local
>> dns domains when the Internet was down.
>
> It seemed to have to do with the TTL for the local names being too
>
On 25/07/2019 22:17, Giles Coochey wrote:
Separate DNS servers must be on a different subnet according to
RFC2182 (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2182):
Secondary servers must be placed at both topologically and
geographically dispersed locations on the Internet, to minimise the
On 25/07/2019 20:39, John Pierce wrote:
On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 10:32 AM hw wrote:
I can't help it when the primary name server goes down because the UPS
fails
the self test and tells the server it has 2 minutes or so left in wich case
the server figures it needs to shut down. I wanted
On 7/25/19 7:10 PM, Nataraj wrote:
[...]
I meant to say:
Configure all dns servers as secondary/slaves (one should be the primary
master) for your own domains. Thos means that all of your servers are
authoritative for your own domains, so they cannot fail on local dns lookups
due to
On Thu, 25 Jul 2019, hw wrote:
On Linux systems, you can set the timeout in /etc/resolv.conf, e.g.,
# I think the default nameserver timeout is 5; use rotate
# option if you prefer round-robin queries rather than
# always using the first-listed first
nameserver 10.11.12.13 timeout:2
On 7/25/19 9:39 PM, John Pierce wrote:
On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 10:32 AM hw wrote:
I can't help it when the primary name server goes down because the UPS
fails
the self test and tells the server it has 2 minutes or so left in wich case
the server figures it needs to shut down. I wanted better
On 7/25/19 9:11 PM, mark wrote:
hw wrote:
On 7/25/19 4:07 PM, Giles Coochey wrote:
Sounds like you're performing maintenance on your servers
(a) too often
(b) during office / peak hours
I can't help it when the primary name server goes down because the UPS
fails the self test and tells
On 7/25/19 7:58 PM, Paul Heinlein wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jul 2019, hw wrote:
On 7/25/19 3:28 PM, Leroy Tennison wrote:
If you don't want multiple DNS server entries on the client
I'm ok with them, only the problem is that the clients take their
timeouts
when a server is unreachable, and users
John Pierce wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 10:32 AM hw wrote:
>
>> I can't help it when the primary name server goes down because the UPS
>> fails the self test and tells the server it has 2 minutes or so left in
>> wich case the server figures it needs to shut down. I wanted better
>> UPSs
On 7/25/19 5:14 PM, Nataraj wrote:
On 7/25/19 6:48 AM, rai...@ultra-secure.de wrote:
Am 2019-07-25 15:41, schrieb hw:
On 7/25/19 2:53 PM, rai...@ultra-secure.de wrote:
Am 2019-07-25 14:51, schrieb hw:
Hi,
how can DNS reliability, as experienced by clients on the LAN who are
sending queries,
On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 10:32 AM hw wrote:
> I can't help it when the primary name server goes down because the UPS
> fails
> the self test and tells the server it has 2 minutes or so left in wich case
> the server figures it needs to shut down. I wanted better UPSs ...
>
critical
hw wrote:
> On 7/25/19 4:07 PM, Giles Coochey wrote:
>> Sounds like you're performing maintenance on your servers
>>
>>
>> (a) too often
>> (b) during office / peak hours
>>
>
> I can't help it when the primary name server goes down because the UPS
> fails the self test and tells the server it
> Am 25.07.2019 um 19:58 schrieb Paul Heinlein :
>
> On Thu, 25 Jul 2019, hw wrote:
>
>> On 7/25/19 3:28 PM, Leroy Tennison wrote:
>>> If you don't want multiple DNS server entries on the client
>>
>> I'm ok with them, only the problem is that the clients take their timeouts
>> when a server
On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 11:00 AM Paul Heinlein wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Jul 2019, hw wrote:
>
> > On 7/25/19 3:28 PM, Leroy Tennison wrote:
> >> If you don't want multiple DNS server entries on the client
> >
> > I'm ok with them, only the problem is that the clients take their
> timeouts
> > when a
On Thu, 25 Jul 2019, hw wrote:
On 7/25/19 3:28 PM, Leroy Tennison wrote:
If you don't want multiple DNS server entries on the client
I'm ok with them, only the problem is that the clients take their timeouts
when a server is unreachable, and users panic.
On Linux systems, you can set the
On 7/25/19 4:07 PM, Giles Coochey wrote:
>
> On 25/07/2019 13:51, hw wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> how can DNS reliability, as experienced by clients on the LAN who are
>> sending queries, be increased?
>>
>> Would I have to set up some sort of cluster consisting of several
>> servers all providing DNS
On 7/25/19 4:49 PM, Nux! wrote:
> I'm about to do an overhaul of the DNS service at work and my plan is to use
> powerdns recursor + dnsdist + keepalived.
I've more or less done the overhaul, only some sort of failover thing
is missing ... I'll check those out, thanks!
On 7/25/19 3:28 PM, Leroy Tennison wrote:
> If you don't want multiple DNS server entries on the client
I'm ok with them, only the problem is that the clients take their timeouts
when a server is unreachable, and users panic.
> then a master and (possibly multiple) slave server configuration can
On 7/25/19 8:14 AM, Nataraj wrote:
> On 7/25/19 6:48 AM, rai...@ultra-secure.de wrote:
>> Am 2019-07-25 15:41, schrieb hw:
>>> On 7/25/19 2:53 PM, rai...@ultra-secure.de wrote:
Am 2019-07-25 14:51, schrieb hw:
> Hi,
>
> how can DNS reliability, as experienced by clients on the LAN
On 7/25/19 6:48 AM, rai...@ultra-secure.de wrote:
> Am 2019-07-25 15:41, schrieb hw:
>> On 7/25/19 2:53 PM, rai...@ultra-secure.de wrote:
>>> Am 2019-07-25 14:51, schrieb hw:
Hi,
how can DNS reliability, as experienced by clients on the LAN who are
sending queries, be
I'm about to do an overhaul of the DNS service at work and my plan is to
use powerdns recursor + dnsdist + keepalived.
---
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
On 2019-07-25 14:28, Leroy Tennison wrote:
If you don't want multiple DNS server entries on the client then a
master
On 7/25/19 3:48 PM, rai...@ultra-secure.de wrote:
> Am 2019-07-25 15:41, schrieb hw:
>> On 7/25/19 2:53 PM, rai...@ultra-secure.de wrote:
>>> Am 2019-07-25 14:51, schrieb hw:
Hi,
how can DNS reliability, as experienced by clients on the LAN who are
sending queries, be
On 25/07/2019 13:51, hw wrote:
Hi,
how can DNS reliability, as experienced by clients on the LAN who are
sending queries, be increased?
Would I have to set up some sort of cluster consisting of several
servers all providing DNS services which is reachable under a single
IP address known to
Am 2019-07-25 15:41, schrieb hw:
On 7/25/19 2:53 PM, rai...@ultra-secure.de wrote:
Am 2019-07-25 14:51, schrieb hw:
Hi,
how can DNS reliability, as experienced by clients on the LAN who are
sending queries, be increased?
Would I have to set up some sort of cluster consisting of several
On 7/25/19 2:53 PM, rai...@ultra-secure.de wrote:
> Am 2019-07-25 14:51, schrieb hw:
>> Hi,
>>
>> how can DNS reliability, as experienced by clients on the LAN who are
>> sending queries, be increased?
>>
>> Would I have to set up some sort of cluster consisting of several
>> servers all providing
Am 2019-07-25 14:51, schrieb hw:
Hi,
how can DNS reliability, as experienced by clients on the LAN who are
sending queries, be increased?
Would I have to set up some sort of cluster consisting of several
servers all providing DNS services which is reachable under a single
IP address known to
32 matches
Mail list logo
