[128774] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Numbering nameservers and resolvers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Aria Stewart)
Mon Aug 16 03:12:17 2010
From: Aria Stewart <aredridel@nbtsc.org>
In-Reply-To: <4C68DF61.6080601@tiedyenetworks.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 01:12:06 -0600
To: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Aug 16, 2010, at 12:49 AM, Mike wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>=20
> I am needing to renumber some core infrastructure - namely, my =
nameservers and my resolvers - and I was wondering if the collective =
wisdom still says heck yes keep this stuff all on seperate subnets away =
from eachother? Anyone got advice either way? Should I try to give =
sequential numbers to my resolvers for the benefit of consultants ... =
like .11, .22 and .33 for my server ips?
Resolvers being easily memorable is nice, since they get keyed in by IP.
Authority servers are referred to by name, so IP matters less.
Definitely keep an authority server in another prefix if you can, and =
resolvers in different prefixes is also nice -- but that's more a =
question of redundancy, not numbering.
Other than that, go dense. Addresses are starting to get scarce.
Aria Stewart=
