Douglas Hubler <dhub...@ezuce.com> wrote on 25-05-2012 14:44:01:
> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 7:23 AM, <pscheep...@epo.org> wrote: > > 2) Use UC DNS for the servers and the company DNS for the clients, this > > means putting the > > necessary records in the company DNS. All records are available on the UC > > servers as well. > > This is the safest I think because the client records are available > > everywhere. No changes on DHCP. > > 3) Use company DNS for all, meaning entering all records in the company DNS. > > This requires special skills and time, but would work OK. > > I don't see any advantage of #3 over #2. If you disable/or enable a > single service in HA, it affects DNS now more than ever, but only for > internal connections between UC components so why open a ticket with > IT to make DNS change when the change does not affect any endpoints. > What we need it a clear list of endpoint related records you should > copy into your company DNS server. > > It may help not to think of the DNS server embedded in UC as a "DNS > Server" but instead as an "name resolution system that happens to > follow the DNS specification" > This is I think the important point. I almost mentioned a host file for the server part, but hostfiles don't support SRV's for example, so that might not work. > This is a good discussion so thanks. Fortunately the distinction > between #2 and #3 is really just a best practices thing and nothing > sipxecs has to do or not do. Yep, the only thing is that the forwarding to the company DNS might be difficult when the UC domain and the company domain are the same, I think a DNS server can't forward domain A when it hosts domain A. > _______________________________________________ > sipx-users mailing list > sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
_______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
