Re: is down, why no backup?

From: Peter Ajamian (
Date: 01/04/01

George Greer wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Peter Ajamian wrote:
> >> I _do_ get requests for
> >> at
> >>
> >The only way I could possibly explain that is that servers which have
> >the ns entry cached from when it was prior working needed an A or CNAME
> >query.  Getting the NS entry from thier cache they were able to find the
> >secondary, not very reliable, though.
> It's better than querying the root servers again.  They get the right
> answer in this case.
I meant that it's not good to rely on nameservers having the secondary
server in thier cache, it really needs to be listed in the root servers
so it can always be found in the event the primary server goes out.

To state the obvious, in an ideal world the secondary server would not
be used or needed.  Unfortunately it is far too common for servers or
connections to go down on the internet so when hosting DNS entries for
so many different machines as does it becomes vitally
important to have at least one secondary (the more the better).

> >Have you been getting a lot of problems from Network Solutions?
> In a few minutes I won't have any domains there. :)

Well, if I understand correctly, the actual transfer can take a week or
longer, but I'm glad to hear that you're changing.

> (Domains come due in February so good time to move them to GANDI.)
I've been using lately, they seem to be pretty
good ($15/year/name).  I'd be happy to hear if there's a better price,

> We'll see if we can get the secondary or tertiary servers listed.

I'm sure you can.  There's a tertiary server for
circlemud.[net|org|com]?  Again, if not and you need one let me know, I
may not have the best server in the world, but it can ceartainly handle
the almost negligible load of a secondary.

Regards, Peter

   | FAQ: |
   | Archives: |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/03/01 PST