Re: DNS primer

[Roger Hayter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Roland 
Perry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Roger Hayter 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
> > > Huh?  DNS servers are operated by random punters,
> >
> > (snip)
> >
> > Not entirely random, in that you cannot nominate a (?primary) DNS 
> > server for a .com or .net domain without getting someone in a hosting 
> > company to vouch for the suitability of the hostname and IP with a 
> > domain registrar.
>
> I operate my DNS servers as a random punter. It's true to say that 
> there's a Hosting company "in the way" and some will only allow 
> standard settings to avoid customer support "issues"; but others give 
> more flexibility. At least one of mine is prepared to change *any* of 
> the settings while we chat on the phone, and another allows me to alter 
> any of the settings that Actually Matter on a day to day basis, via a 
> web interface.
>
> Of course, that for just one kind of DNS server. The ones controlled by 
> eg Nominet, or the much misunderstood root name servers, are entirely 
> in their owners hands.

Yes this does seem to be a little-known rule.  When I tried to set up my 
shiny new server with a perfectly good hostname and satisfactory IP 
address and rDNS as a primary server for a domain, it was rejected (?By 
ICANN) until my hosting company sent a special message to the registrar 
of the domain the *server* hostname was in, asking them to register this 
particular host as a satisfactory DNS server, entirely additional to 
registering the domain it was in and the domain it served.  I looked 
this up in Google and found only one vague reference in a relevant 
mailing list by someone complaining he could not register a domain using 
his own domain server and being told about the above scenario.  This is 
so off-topic, I promise not to discuss it more on list.

--
Roger Hayter