On Mon, Mar 08, 1999 at 09:20:24AM -0500, alex@nac.net wrote:
Anyone in a situation like this, I'm willing to do secondaries for these sorts of domains, and plan to build a secondary-dns-server engine that people would be able to send templates to, etc..
Same here; nac.net would be willing to host any secondary DNS for anyone, specifically TLDs or foreign folks. Foreign to the US, that is :-)
IMHO, the internic should not allow any domains to have pri+sec nameserver in the same /24
Amen, except it can be misleading.
NS1.NAC.NET 207.99.0.1 NS2.NAC.NET 207.99.0.2 NS6.NAC.NET 209.123.20.243
Whilst 207.99.0.1 and .2 are on the same /24 (obviously), 207.99.0/24 is subnetted to 256 /32's, and routed to the machines. Why? So, when a machine/name-server moves within our network, it doesn't have to be renumbered.
My point is that you're doing it correctly. If you lose one of your aggregate blocks, it's not going to cause a problem. Like for example, if someone else started to announce your /24 or a /19 with your dns servers in it. You also distribute nameservers geographically, so if you lose power in a location, you don't die. - jared -- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared@puck.nether.net clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.