1

In what way are resolvers concerned or affected by having a non-authorative response from the primary and all available secondary nameservers?

Would a setup like this where the primary master nameserver is listed in the public NS records result in problems? If so, what kind of problems?

3

The terms primary and secondary nameservers is usually used to denote the authoritative ("official") name servers of a certain domain. For example, NS-1029.AWSDNS-00.ORG is one of the authoritative name servers for the domain stackexchange.com, i.e. it gives authoritative responses (by definition) for this domain.

A name server can also be a (caching) recursive name server, which you can ask to do a lookup for any domain. A name server like this is hardly ever the authoritative name server for any random domain you query, so they respond with a non-authoritative answer.

Your local resolver libraries do not know that these are somehow "blessed" name servers, they are only aware of the name servers you have configured in, for example, /etc/resolv.conf.

A response to a query being non-authoritative hardly matters to a resolver, it is the best response available using the configured mechanism.

  • Cool cool "A response to a query being non-authoritative hardly matters to a resolver, it is the best response available using the configured mechanism." is exactly what I was looking for. – Evan Carroll May 14 at 15:00

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.