named.conf "option forwarder" vs. resolv.conf "nameserver"?

named.conf "option forwarder" vs. resolv.conf "nameserver"?

Post by Steve Snyde » Tue, 15 Jun 1999 04:00:00



Can someone explain to this DNS/BIND newbie the functional distinction
between the "options forwarder" in named.conf and the "nameserver" in
resolv.conf?

To me, they sound like they act identically: if a name cannot be resolved
locally, the specified remote host is called upon to do the resolution.

I currently have my RedHat v6.0 system (/w BIND v8.2) configured with the
addresses of 2 nameservers in /etc/named.conf.  If a name can't be resolved
from my local cache, the request for resolution is forwarded to either the
primary or secondary nameserver of my ISP, both listed in /etc/resolv.conf.
I'm wondering, though, if there would be any advantage in having the
addresses of those nameservers in "options forward" statements.  Would
there?

Thank you.

***** Steve Snyder *****

 
 
 

named.conf "option forwarder" vs. resolv.conf "nameserver"?

Post by Barry Margol » Tue, 15 Jun 1999 04:00:00




>Can someone explain to this DNS/BIND newbie the functional distinction
>between the "options forwarder" in named.conf and the "nameserver" in
>resolv.conf?

>To me, they sound like they act identically: if a name cannot be resolved
>locally, the specified remote host is called upon to do the resolution.

That's only true if you're running a nameserver on the local machine.  Most
people don't run a nameserver on their workstation, and the nameserver line
in resolv.conf is how they tell the resolver where the nameserver is.

The forwarders option in named.conf is used to force the nameserver to send
its non-local queries to a specific server.  Normally, the nameserver will
perform an iterative query by starting from the root servers.

--

GTE Internetworking, Powered by BBN, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.