Re: NS records for subzone cause BIND 9 failures

This is a discussion on Re: NS records for subzone cause BIND 9 failures within the Bind Users forums, part of the DNS and Related Forums category; > > > > >When a parent zone has subzone data in it, NS records for the subzone > &...


Go Back   Usenet Forums > DNS and Related Forums > Bind Users

FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 03-22-2005
Mark Andrews
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NS records for subzone cause BIND 9 failures


> >
> > >When a parent zone has subzone data in it, NS records for the subzone
> > >will cause BIND 9 servers to fail to resolve any of the subzone's
> > >data. The problem does not exist with 8.2.3, but does with 9.2.1 and
> > >9.3.0.
> > >

> > Well, it's not a "problem"; it's the way DNS is supposed to work. When
> > you delegate a zone to other nameservers, then those nameservers own the
> > data in the zone, not you. The only exceptions are so-called "glue"
> > records describing the nameservers for the child zone. Ordinary records,
> > like A records which are not associated with nameservers, MX records and
> > so forth, belong to the "closest enclosing zone", i.e. the child (or
> > "child-most") zone.
> >

>
> In our situation, the BIND 9 servers are secondary for the parent
> zone, but not the subzone. The users at our location cannot resolve
> any of the subzone data that is in the parent zone, but users at other
> locations where they are running BIND 8 or Microsoft DNS can resolve
> it. The subzone data in the parent zone are two NS records and A
> records for the two subzone name servers.
>
> It looks like Microsoft DNS will use the data in the parent zone to
> query the subzone name servers for the subzone data, but BIND will
> not. This is the second time I have run into this problem, and have
> solved it by slaving the subzone.
>
> This leaves me with two questions. My original question was why can't
> BIND 9 resolve subzone data from a parent zone when NS records for the
> subzone are in it?


Sounds like you have forwarding enabled and havn't disabled
forwarding for the subzone and/or you have recursion disabled.

> In other words, if you have a bar.com zone with the following in it:
>
> $ORIGIN bar.com
> foo NS ns1.foo
> $ORIGIN foo.bar.com
> ns1 A 1.2.3.4
>
> Why can you resolve both the A and NS records with BIND 8, but nothing
> with BIND 9? If the NS records are removed, the A records will resolve
> with BIND 9.
>
> And the other question is can you delegate a subzone by putting NS and
> A records for the subzone's servers in the parent zone? The answer
> about glue records seems to indicate this is possible and it appears
> that Microsoft DNS supports this, but it does not work with BIND 8 or
> 9. I know Microsoft likes to make their own rules and seem to try to
> be incompatible so they can take over the world, but a lot of the
> people in other parts of my company are pro Microsoft and would like
> to see BIND go away. The perspective "problem" with my BIND 9 servers
> is giving them reason to push for a pure Microsoft solution.
>
>

--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews@isc.org


Reply With Quote
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.0.0