Difference between secondary and slave dns servers

What is the difference between secondary and slave dns servers?

Are they synonyms or are there some subtle diffference between them?

Davide Bianchi wrote:
> On 2006-11-14, voipfc <voipfc@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > What is the difference between secondary and slave dns servers?
>
> A Seconday DNS is a dns that is mantained by hand but is (usually) only
> used as a backup in case the first one goest titsup, a Slave actually
> receive automatic update from the master whenever the master data changes.
> If the master is incorrectly configured, the slave will reflect the wrong
> info.
>

Does this mean that in order to have a server as a secondary DNS
server, when updates to the master are notified to the secondary
servers, that the records from the master have to be added as though
the secondary is another master server?

I guess that means that if I use some kind of tool to make changes on
the primary server, for the purposes of integrity, the tool should have
the ability to make the changes on the secondaries simultaneously.

If that is the case I suppose that the notify option in bind applies to
'slave' servers not 'secondary' servers, and that if the secondaries
are notified, they strictly have to go to some other source to
retrieve the changes, not to the primary.

Is the mean difference between secondaries and slaves the fact that
slaves are not supposed to respond if their master goes down?

I think I am going round in circles, but can some of the servers on the
notify list be made to automatically insert and update new zones based
on a link with the master, ie what setting makes a server view itself
as secondary for a zone rather than a slave?


> Davide
>
> --
> Bill Gates did not realize was that his daughter would grow up to be a
> rebel and would never use anything but Linux for her whole life.