[Pdns-users] PDNS - Mysql

[Volven D'souza]

What if the slave domain resided on Bind and not on PDNS? What additional
setup would be needed on the PDNS for zone transfer to succeed?

Regards

Volven

-----Original Message-----
From: pdns-users-bounces at mailman.powerdns.com
[mailto:pdns-users-bounces at mailman.powerdns.com] On Behalf Of Mark Martin
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 2:10 AM
To: Lorens Kockum
Cc: pdns-users at mailman.powerdns.com
Subject: Re: [Pdns-users] PDNS - Mysql

Thank's that is exactly what I was looking to confirm, and that is how it
is set up.  Just didn't know if there was a 'proper' syntactically correct
method to install in the server.
Thanks again, (:-)
Lorens Kockum wrote:

>On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 03:37:03PM -0500, Mark Martin wrote:
>  
>
>>I would like to convert my existing bind 9 (ISC Bind dns) from BIND to
PDNS, I have
>>PDNS working on my test server(s), complete with replication (MYSQL) as
well as
>>importing zones to it, it works.
>>
>>Main thing, in BIND, typically (I am sure there are other deviations), ns1
is a master,
>>ns2 is a slave, they both answer queries, the main difference, is that ns2
is basically
>>a backup of ns1.  This is probably the most basic setup, depends what one
wants to do
>>and how complex a dns they need in their operation.  Don't necessarily
have to run
>>it this way, but this is our implementation.
>>    
>>
>
>Ok, it's basic but it's easy to miss I suppose :-)
>
>You say "master" for the server with the set of data that you modify,
>and "slave" for the sets of data that are synchronized to the master.
>
>When you query a DNS server you don't care or even know which
>server is using the "master" data for the zone. The SOA is
>supposed to mention the name of the "master" server, for
>human-diagnostic purposes, and that's it.
>
>So, master-slave is *purely* implementation.
>
>In a conventional bind setup, you tell the master server to
>fetch the zone from a file, and the slave servers to fetch the
>zone from the master using AXFR. But you could easily duplicate
>the files using rsync or whatever, and tell all your servers to
>fetch the zones from the files! All servers are configured as
>a master server would be. You could say that the master is the
>server that has the "master" data, but in the case where the
>"master" file or files is on yet another server, you can't even
>do that, all servers are exactly identical.
>
>Same thing in pdns. When you put MASTER/SLAVE in the zone type
>you're telling pdns that AXFR is used. When you put NATIVE,
>you're saying that AXFR is not used, and that the database is
>maintained through means external to pdns. (That would mean
>native database replication, since I don't think there's a
>serious alternative, but pdns doesn't actually force you to use
>that.) Like in the preceding paragraph, your "master" database
>can easily be yet another server, that doesn't run pdns, and all
>your pdns servers are exactly identical.
>
>So, conclusion: if you've set up database replication, all your
>zones should be "NATIVE".
>
>Hope this helped, and that you will be as happy with pdns I am!
>_______________________________________________
>Pdns-users mailing list
>Pdns-users at mailman.powerdns.com
>http://mailman.powerdns.com/mailman/listinfo/pdns-users
>
>
>  
>
_______________________________________________
Pdns-users mailing list
Pdns-users at mailman.powerdns.com
http://mailman.powerdns.com/mailman/listinfo/pdns-users