Skip to main content

domain name system - Impact of changing DNS glue records from registrar



I have three domains from three different registrars (e.g. example.com, example.net, example.org). The DNS records for each domain is handled separately using the control panel of each registrar. I wish to centralize all zones to a single service by changing all Glue Records to point to a single DNS server say ns1.example.net.



The procedure i end up is:





  1. Create each zone on the new server.

  2. "Copy" all records (A, AAAA, MX e.t.c) from registrars to the equivalent zone.

  3. Change glue records on all domains to point to the new server ns1.example.net



However, I am troubled with the following:




  1. Any cached A-Record queries from clients or resolvers shouldn't be an issue since the records of my NS server will point to the same IPs just as the original records did. Is that correct?



  2. What about the NS record queries? Do clients or recursive DNS Servers cache NS record queries? If this is the case, then, there is a possibility as soon as I change the glue record, clients will try to query old DNS server (registrar`s).




Regarding No 2, the way I see it, if the registrar stops responding to DNS queries as soon as I delegate the zone to another server... then I am helpless. Do registrars foreseen such situations and keep serving queries, lets say for another 24 hours, from the time you change the glue records?


Answer




1) Any cached A-Record queries from clients or resolvers shouldn't be an issue since the records of my NS server will point to the same IPs just as the original records did. Is that correct?




That is correct.





2)What about the NS record queries? Do clients or recursive DNS Servers cache ns record queries?If this is the case, then, there is a possibility as soon as I change the glue record, clients will try to query old dns server (registrar`s).



Regarding No 2, the way i see it, if the registrar stops responding to dns queries as soon as I delegate the zone to another server...then I am helpless. Do registrars foreseen such situations and keep serving queries, lets say for another 24 hours, from the time you change the glue records?




Yes, clients and servers cache NS RRs just like all other RRs.



You may be confusing registrars and DNS providers. For example, I use Dyn as my registrar and cloudflare as my DNS provider. If I were to change registrars the clouldflare DNS servers would still respond to queries for my domain until I deleted it from cloudflare's name servers.




If your registrar and DNS provider are the same you'll need to ask them. They could immediately reconfigure their name servers the moment you change the registrar away from them and servers / clients that have the NS RR cached will fail to resolve RRs in those domains.



That being said, that wouldn't be nice for a registrar/DNS provider to do that so they probably don't.



Aside: If you are going to be setting the NS records for domainA.net, domainB.net, domainC.net under mydomain.net (ns1.mydomain.net) you will no longer have glue records for those domains. You will for ns1.mydomain.net. What these means:




  1. These domains will require an additional DNS query since the NS RRs will not be in the additional info section which will cause a slight performance impact.

  2. You will be able to set the TTLs for the NS RRs for these domains. Typically glue NS RRs have 48 hour TTLs and you can't change that. E.g., dig ns cloudflare.net @192.5.6.30



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