On Sun, Mar 30, 2003 at 01:39:18PM -0600, Cowles, Steve wrote: > > If you have only one host and it's your nameserver as well as > > your mail server, why add redundancy? If the nameserver is > > down, so is the rest of the domain. It's not up to the > > registrars to tell you how to configure your domain. > > Point taken - at least the part about the registrars responsibility. But it > seems like back when I registered my first domain (1996/Network Solutions) I > don't remember being able to register the same IP for both name servers. > Maybe I just didn't try hard enough. Anyway, I have since moved away from > network solutions. > > As for redundancy/failover... I run my own DNS/Mail server on the same box. > If my end goes down, its nice to know that my secondary DNS server (located > in another state) will still answer DNS queries for my domains and queue > e-mail for later delivery. i.e. No DSN is sent. So my domain names are not > "totally" down even though I have a single point of failure at my end.
Not true. If your mail server is down, what good is a secondary DNS server going to do by answering with MX and A records for the downed server? The clients will receive the records, try to connect, get a timeout, and queue the mail for later delivery (and they may generate DSNs, which you cannot control). This is hardly different from having a single DNS server which has failed, because in that case, the SMTP client will get a soft DNS error from its resolver, and still queue the mail (and possibly generate a DSN which is not in your control). -- Anand Buddhdev http://anand.org -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
