[Samba] which DNS backend ?

[John Gardeniers]

Thanks Rowland. Perhaps because I expected these basic issues to have 
been resolved long ago I never thought to check the SOA records. You are 
perfectly correct - the second DC is not listed.

I will say however that other than this, All the DNS issues I 
encountered during my early testing phase, and there were a lot of them, 
occurred with both internal and BIND DNS. As a consequence, we use Samba 
DNS only for the AD domain and external BIND (on the same machine but on 
a separate IP address) for everything else. machines point to the Samba 
DNS servers, which forward to BIND for non-domain queries. Not an ideal 
solution perhaps but one which definitely works, solved every issue we 
encountered and is completely transparent to the users.

regards,
John


On 29/02/16 07:40, Rowland penny wrote:
> On 28/02/16 20:25, John Gardeniers wrote:
>> Hi Rowland,
>>
>> Would you care to elaborate on that last sentence? I've not seen that 
>> mentioned before and I'm very curios about your reasons for saying 
>> it, especially as we're using internal DNS for our two DCs.
>>
>> regards,
>> John
>>
>>
>
> OK, two main reasons, I have never used the internal dns server and I 
> have never had any real dns problems, read a lot of posts from people 
> who have, but they use the internal dns server. The second reason is 
> that the internal dns server seems to ignore the SOA record for the 
> second DC (note that you have to add this manually). Bind9 does see 
> both SOA records and the second DC is authoritative for the domain if 
> the first DC goes down for any reason, this doesn't happen with the 
> internal dns server.
>
> Rowland
>
>