Results 1 to 20 of 20
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    39

    DNS all on one server vs Hosted DNS

    I'm quite new to having a dedicated server so please excuse me if this sounds stupid.

    Do I need to have a secondary hosted DNS if my site, mail server, etc. are all on one server? Or do should I just have both the primary and secondary dns hosted on my box? Is there any advantage to the secondary DNS being offsite in this situation?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Memphis, TN
    Posts
    1,225
    Well the main advantage to having a second "backup" DNS server at a different location, is Redundancy.


    Its not required, but if your primary name servers went down, you'd have backups.


    But no, you can have all your Name Servers on one box.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    501
    If your using cPanel/WHM you can download a free program from cPanel's site called DNSOnly. You can then pickup a couple of cheap dedicated servers in different locations or a couple of VPS's and use them as your dedicated DNS servers.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    611
    How does having it on different servers help? If they all point to the 1 server what is the point?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    1,648
    1) Preventing mail from immediately bouncing if MTAs are unable to resolve an A record or MX entry for your domain

    2) Preventing lookup failures from being cached thus increasing your outage in the event of a server failure.
    Eric Spaeth
    Enterprise Network Engineer :: Hosting Hobbyist :: Master of Procrastination
    "The really cool thing about facts is they remain true regardless of who states them."

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    611
    So what should I use as DNS servers? Where should I get some cheap ones?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    251
    I think registrars require 2 NS per zone for the reason of redundancy. Just that there are way too many domains having both their NS served on different IPs on the same physical server, which totally defeat the purpose. You can get a cheap VPS with 64Mb RAM and run DNSonly as Eric has suggested. Or look out for free or paid services that can do secondary NS for you (which would probably be cheaper if you don't have lots of domains to host). Scott

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    230
    I would NEVER host DNS on the same machine as web servers. I would purchase two more dedicated servers somewhere and put them there, and then use a secondary service such as DNSMADEEASY.com.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    813
    Maybe he can't afford 3 webservers ?

    G
    PutFile.io Disrupting traditional file hosting.
    █ Signup Early and enjoy Unlimited space/bandwidth for your files hosting, Forever!
    █ No Ads.
    █ No Countdowns.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    39
    Thanks for the replies so far! So is going with my primary being the name server on my box and then my 2-4 nameservers being some free dns hosting company a good way to go then?

    Can anyone suggestions some good free or low cost dns hosting sites?

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    39
    One more question, does having multiple dns at different locations speed up the site at all for visitors since they would be located differently geographically?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Newport Beach, CA
    Posts
    2,920
    Quote Originally Posted by rob5
    I would NEVER host DNS on the same machine as web servers. I would purchase two more dedicated servers somewhere and put them there, and then use a secondary service such as DNSMADEEASY.com.

    yeah and I build my websites in notepad.
    Show your reciprocal links on your website. eReferrer

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Newport Beach, CA
    Posts
    2,920
    Quote Originally Posted by tropicw
    One more question, does having multiple dns at different locations speed up the site at all for visitors since they would be located differently geographically?
    No, DNS is not chosen like that. it's random.

    ns1.site.com
    ns2.site.com

    does not mean it will use one then the other. it is completely random. Not only that, but in today's world there's no sense in moving dns to gain speed. You'd be better off taking the IP of the user and directing them to a geographically closer node that hosts your website.

    That being said it's all WAY overkill.

    There's nothing wrong with hosting DNS on your webserver. Put it this way. Ideally you'd have separate servers for ALL services. one for databases, one for mail, one for DNS, one for websites. but it's not practical, or necessary.

    I would probably consider getting another server for a secondary DNS but that's only for failover, and if you're going to do that, you need it in a separate datacenter to be ideal. But again, it's not needed at all.
    Last edited by fastnoc; 10-12-2006 at 12:24 AM.
    Show your reciprocal links on your website. eReferrer

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    251
    Quote Originally Posted by tropicw
    Thanks for the replies so far! So is going with my primary being the name server on my box and then my 2-4 nameservers being some free dns hosting company a good way to go then?

    Can anyone suggestions some good free or low cost dns hosting sites?
    I have used ZoneEdit, EveryDNS and EditDNS for free DNS hosting. The problem is you cannot rebrand these free DNS services, i.e. setting up A records and calling their NS ns1.yourdomain.com and ns2.yourdomain.com, etc. It is sometimes considered necessary for reselling web hosting.

    There are some low cost ones that allow you to rebrand, and have SLA with their services. Sorry I have no experience with any paid DNS-hosting.

    Scott

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    230
    Quote Originally Posted by tropicw
    Thanks for the replies so far! So is going with my primary being the name server on my box and then my 2-4 nameservers being some free dns hosting company a good way to go then?

    Can anyone suggestions some good free or low cost dns hosting sites?
    dnsmadeeasy.com is one of the best. 100% uptime in 5 years, and you can pretty much manage all aspects of DNS with their control panel. you can even set it up so you can use ns1.yourdomain.com, ns2.yourdomain.com if you wanted to.

  16. #16
    There was a guy, in the offers section, hosting cpanel DNS only VPS servers (anyone who's seen any of my posts will be stunned I'm recommending a VPS, but I think this is a good use of it) for $10 a month. As long as all your running is DNS, and your main server is cpanel (which syncs nicely to this vps), it's a good deal..

    I was exploring that option, but had an opportunity to get a second sever for essentially free, and went that route instead.

    -Jason
    Have you considered Semi-dedicated Hosting? 4 - 8 accounts per server. Less overhead than VPS, better performance for the price.
    DopeDomains.com - 15,000 New Domains a day. indexed by Pagerank, backlinks, Hits, and Length.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    296
    Quote Originally Posted by rob5
    dnsmadeeasy.com is one of the best. 100% uptime in 5 years, and you can pretty much manage all aspects of DNS with their control panel. you can even set it up so you can use ns1.yourdomain.com, ns2.yourdomain.com if you wanted to.
    I'll 2nd the recommendation for dnsmadeeasy.com they offer a wonderful service and the price is vary fair. It's a far cheaper and easier to manage solution than getting a couple cheap servers or vps'.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    187
    I use dnsmadeeasy.com because there are many features that can come in handy. For example, I have failover on some domains. When one of the server goes down, it automatically switches to another IP (on a different machine at a different server farm). This isn't pratical in all situations but for static html sites, it works great.

    The mail queues at dnsmadeeasy until the original IP is reachable again and then it delivers the mail. DNSmadeeasy.com is quite cheap as well. I think I pay like 50 bucks per year for a thousand domains.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    330
    Its all irrelevant.....I host both DNS on the same box as the web server...no big deal....I work primarily as a developer...and yes its nice to have a WEB server separated from the DB server....but unless you have a WEB farm its irrelevant. If your WEB server goes down, your whole application goes down....

    Im hosting a dedicated box with Krypt and my Xeon 2.8 with 1GB of ram (2500GB bandwith) handles 4 websites + 4 forums.....I also have my own ASP.NET application with MS SQL DB....and Im hosting my DNS on it + 3 (30slots) game servers ....no problem whats so ever.

    If you want to seprate all components by type to different servers (DNS, SQL DB, Web Server) you would need at least 2 of each servers to host that redundancy, otherwise its pointless.

    just my $0.02
    Last edited by ShyGuy82; 10-12-2006 at 09:19 PM.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    4,612
    Quote Originally Posted by spaethco
    1) Preventing mail from immediately bouncing if MTAs are unable to resolve an A record or MX entry for your domain 2) Preventing lookup failures from being cached thus increasing your outage in the event of a server failure.
    I just wanted to reiterate what Eric said, as this is often overlooked. Even if you keep all your services on one server, you will still benefit from having at least one of your DNS servers offsite. Mainly, it allows mail servers to queue the mail until you come back online so that the mail doesn't bounce with a DNS-related "host not found" error. Instead, as long as the hostname resolves, it will just try again later.
    Scott Burns, President
    BQ Internet Corporation
    Remote Rsync and FTP backup solutions
    *** http://www.bqbackup.com/ ***

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •