domain name system - DNS A vs NS record

I'm trying to understand DNS a bit better, but I still don't get A and NS records completely.

As far as I understood, the A record tells which IP-address belongs to a (sub) domain, so far it was still clear to me. But as I understood, the NS record tells which nameserver points belongs to a (sub) domain, and that nameserver should tell which IP-address belongs to a (sub) domain. But that was already specified in the A record in the same DNS file. So can someone explain to me what the NS records and nameservers exactly do, because probably I understood something wrong.

edit: As I understand you correctly, a NS record tells you were to find the DNS server with the A record for a certain domain, and the A record tells you which ip-address belongs to a domain. But what is the use of putting an A and an NS record in the same DNS file? If there is already an A record for a certain domain, then why do you need to point to another DNS server, which would probably give you the same information?

Answer

Some examples out of the fictitious foo.com zone file

 ....... SOA record & lots more stuff .......
 foo.com.      IN        NS        ns1.bar.com.

 foo.com.      IN        A         192.168.100.1
 ....... More A/CNAME/AAAA/etc. records .......

A Record = "The host called foo.com lives at address 192.168.100.1"
NS Record = "If you want to know about hosts in the foo.com zone, ask the name server ns1.bar.com"

Comments

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?

ubuntu - Monitoring CPU, Mem, disk, on a single server

I've been looking for a simple starter solution for monitoring my [currently] single server hosted solution. Other than Nagios and similar, are there other good (simple) solutions people are using? Answer Everything depends on what you want. For example Munin is very simple, you can install and configure it in less then 10 minutes (on one server), it can sends alarms, make graphs from monitoring cpu, mem. apache connections, eaccellerator, disk io and many many more (it has many plugins). But if you are planning in future get some more machines, munin may not be enough. For example in munin you cant monitor state of individual processes, can't monitor changes in files (for security purpose). So if you wanna only see what is the utilization of basics parameters on your server and don't plan to buy some more servers Munin is what you are looking for, but if you wanna be alarmed when some of your service is down, take more control on what is happeninig on...

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, ...

Blog

Search This Blog