[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: apache-dns cname-vhost



also sprach Jesse <jg@floridasunonline.net> [2002.01.18.1939 +0100]:
> We have a caching only nameserver on our firewall.  Apparently, whoever 
> setup the original DNS on that machine "had" to put zone files in there 
> pointing to our internal host in order for the local lan to access our 
> hosted sites.  The caching nameserver's A records all use a 
> 192.168.1.XXX address to point to the internal server.

if it's caching-only, why does it even have A records? it shouldn't have
a zone, and there is no reason why you have to put one there.

> The internal 
> server is running DNS and all it's A records use the actual registered 
> (is that the right word?) static IP

official/global would be better.

> 1.  How does the actual IP address translation happen?  If external 
> requests hit our caching nameserver which then points to an internal 
> IP, does the caching nameserver query the internal one, and then pass 
> the IP address it gets back from the internal nameserver to the 
> external request?

if you want me to answer this, then send the named.conf of all involved
servers, and all zone files to me privately. also include a topological
map of your network, and how you want it to work ideally.

> 2.  The mail services are currently defined using A records something 
> like this:
> mail.ourdomain.com IN A ip_address
> 
> where ip_address is a local ip on the caching nameserver and the 
> registered ip on the internal server.  I tried changing these to MX 
> records and mail just died.  I used this form:
> mail.ourdomain.com IN MX 10 ourdomain.com.

what's the MTA? again, i need to see the zone files for that.

-- 
martin;              (greetings from the heart of the sun.)
  \____ echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:"; net@madduck
  
1-800-psych
hello, welcome to the psychiatric hotline.
if you are co-dependent, please ask someone to press 2.

Attachment: pgp5kbUbWGFpw.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: