Re: Secondary DNS for Paraguay's TLD?

[Jared Mauch <jared () puck nether net>]

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.