Skip to main content

domain name system - Why should one have a secondary DNS server?



I'm very confused.




I basically understand how DNS works. Here's an example that helps illustrate what I'm having trouble understanding.



Right now, I run a small web-server. I use my provider's DNS manager, so I don't have a DNS server hosted on the machine.



Let's say for a second, that I don't use my host's DNS, and I decide to set up a DNS server on my server. Hypothetical scenario: my server (entire) server goes down - DNS included. Why do I need backup DNS? If the server is down, who cares if the DNS server is down too, considering that even if I had DNS up (it wasn't on the crashed server), it wouldn't be able to forward requests anyway since the server would be down?



Is the point of having secondary DNS, to be able to change the IP addresses that your DNS server points to, so if your webserver was down, you could redirect traffic to a backup? How would you switch to the secondary provider, in the event that your main DNS provider becomes unavailable? Is a backup DNS system basically up all the time? How is it configured? Is it just an exact clone of the DNS server you would have on your server? Do they run simultaneously?



Hopefully someone can see what I'm hung up on, and provide some guidance.



Answer



The major point in having a secondary DNS server is as backup in the event the primary DNS server handling your domain goes down. In this case, your server would be still up, and so without having a backup, nobody could get to your server possibly costing you lots of lost customers (i.e. REAL MONEY).



A secondary DNS server is always up, and ready to serve. It can help balance the load on the network as there are now more than one authoritative place to get your information. Updates are generally performed automatically from the master DNS. Thus it is an exact clone of the master.



Generally a DNS server contains more information than just a single server, it might contain mail routing information, information for many many hosts, mail spam keys, etc. So resilancy and redundancy are of DEFINITE benefit to domain holders.



I hope this helps your understanding.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

linux - iDRAC6 Virtual Media native library cannot be loaded

When attempting to mount Virtual Media on a iDRAC6 IP KVM session I get the following error: I'm using Ubuntu 9.04 and: $ javaws -version Java(TM) Web Start 1.6.0_16 $ uname -a Linux aud22419-linux 2.6.28-15-generic #51-Ubuntu SMP Mon Aug 31 13:39:06 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux $ firefox -version Mozilla Firefox 3.0.14, Copyright (c) 1998 - 2009 mozilla.org On Windows + IE it (unsurprisingly) works. I've just gotten off the phone with the Dell tech support and I was told it is known to work on Linux + Firefox, albeit Ubuntu is not supported (by Dell, that is). Has anyone out there managed to mount virtual media in the same scenario?
Post a Comment
Read more

hp proliant - Smart Array P822 with HBA Mode?

We get an HP DL360 G8 with an Smart Array P822 controller. On that controller will come a HP StorageWorks D2700 . Does anybody know, that it is possible to run the Smart Array P822 in HBA mode? I found only information about the P410i, who can run HBA. If this is not supported, what you think about the LSI 9207-8e controller? Will this fit good in that setup? The Hardware we get is used but all original from HP. The StorageWorks has 25 x 900 GB SAS 10K disks. Because the disks are not new I would like to use only 22 for raid6, and the rest for spare (I need to see if the disk count is optimal or not for zfs). It would be nice if I'm not stick to SAS in future. As OS I would like to install debian stretch with zfs 0.71 as file system and software raid. I have see that hp has an page for debian to. I would like to use hba mode because it is recommend, that zfs know at most as possible about the disk, and I'm independent from the raid controller. For us zfs have many benefits,
Post a Comment
Read more

apache 2.2 - Server Potentially Compromised -- c99madshell

So, low and behold, a legacy site we've been hosting for a client had a version of FCKEditor that allowed someone to upload the dreaded c99madshell exploit onto our web host. I'm not a big security buff -- frankly I'm just a dev currently responsible for S/A duties due to a loss of personnel. Accordingly, I'd love any help you server-faulters could provide in assessing the damage from the exploit. To give you a bit of information: The file was uploaded into a directory within the webroot, "/_img/fck_uploads/File/". The Apache user and group are restricted such that they can't log in and don't have permissions outside of the directory from which we serve sites. All the files had 770 permissions (user rwx, group rwx, other none) -- something I wanted to fix but was told to hold off on as it wasn't "high priority" (hopefully this changes that). So it seems the hackers could've easily executed the script. Now I wasn't able
Post a Comment
Read more