Search Again:

Re: Primary vs. Secondary

From: Men & Mice Support
Date: Sunday, May 7, 2000
Time: 12:55:36 pm

At 11:54 AM -0700 5/7/00, Peter Lalor wrote:
>I wanted to belatedly chime in on this one now that I've turned it
>over in my head for awhile.
>
>>From: "Global Homes Webmaster" <webmaster@globalhomes.com>
>>
>>On 05/03/00 at 16:21, Joe LeBlanc wrote:
>>
>>> I always thought that my Secondary DNS server would only get use if the
>>> Primary one is down, or not available. Yet it gets as much traffic as the
>>> Primary. Is this normal? and if not, any reason that the Secondary one is
>> > getting hit so hard? Thanks.
>>
>>As far as resolving DNS queries is concerned, there's no difference between
>>'primary' and 'secondary' name servers. Which is to say that, in
>>this context,
>>the terms 'primary' and 'secondary' do not imply that one is the
>>'main' server
>>and the other is a 'back-up' server. There's no provision in the DNS database
>>(i.e. in NS records) for differentiating between primary and secondary
>>servers, so all of the servers with authority for a given domain are treated
>>as peers. In fact, there is really no way to guarantee that NS records will
>>even be returned in any particular order in response to queries. All name
>>servers listed in NS records for a domain should expect to see a
>>roughly equal
>>number of requests for the domain. (Most resolvers will tend use the server
>>that responds fastest, but you should still expect all of your name
>>servers to
>>get some significant share of the traffic.)
>>
>> Christopher Bort



Messages In This Thread:



Return to Digital Point Solutions' Home Page