DNS Strategy: Registrar, Linode, or 3rd party

I've been using everydns.net for my domains.

This has worked out quite well, because it makes switching webhosts/email hosts very easy, and ensures that I can update DNS only when the new website is up and running.

I like Linode's DNS service. Free DNS hosts are often crippled (pay to change the TTL, pay to have more than X records, etc.), and Linode's isn't. There are also 4 different servers, which gives pretty good redundancy.

Also, I can sidestep figuring out which free DNS host is best and having to remember another username and password. ;)

What about using multiple services? For instance, you host the primary and use Linode's service as a secondary/slave?

I have used www.Dyndns.com for my register/dns provider

Love their service // all my dns changes typically update within seconds and I have never had a DNS related issue with any of my hosting thus far.

Thanks for all your input.

It sounds like using a registrar or 3rd party provider has the advantage of being one centralized place to manage all domains, even those not hosted here. 3rd party may have more features, but comes at a cost.

The idea of using Linode's DNS service as a slave to one of the above services seems interesting…I guess it would just provide more redundancy in case of an outage at the other provider?

I'll second using dyndns.org, at least for domain registration. It costs a bit more than, say, GoDaddy, but the experience is night and day.

I don't use them for DNS, actually; after I quit being grandfathered into DNS Made Easy's older pricing, I started hosting my own DNS. I needed it to read from a database so I whipped something up to do that.

@xerbutter:

The idea of using Linode's DNS service as a slave to one of the above services seems interesting…I guess it would just provide more redundancy in case of an outage at the other provider?
What I meant was hosting the DNS yourself and using Linode's DNS servers as the slaves.

Check out this post for more details.

I currently use Virtualmin GPL to configure my domains (yeah I know I'm lazy). My server hosts the master zone and Linode's servers host the slave.

Otherwise I would just use Linode's DNS service. Its free. Why not? :wink:

When you say "my server," I'm curious what you mean. Do you mean your linode?

Personally, I think it's silly to host DNS on your linode and use the linode dns servers. Each have their own benefits, but not so much in combination.

Hosting your own…

Benefits: Maximal control over zone files, control of server features

Drawbacks: Not distributed, traffic costs against your quota, server eats against your memory

Using Linode…

Benefits: Distributed, doesn't cost you ram or bandwidth

Drawbacks: No super fancy features (but they do all most sites will need)

If you combine the two, you're losing your bandwidth and resources, but you're not really gaining any extra bandwidth or distribution. If your datacenter is up, linode's dns server is available, and so is yours. If it's offline, then both are offline.

Therefore, this scheme is only really beneficial if the personal server being referred to is somewhere completely different.

Using linode's servers as secondaries gives you redundancy; they have DNS servers in Fremont (ns2), Atlanta (ns3), Dallas (ns1) and Newark (ns4). If your own linode goes down then there's a good chance that one of the other DNS servers is still up :-)

@sweh:

Using linode's servers as secondaries gives you redundancy; they have DNS servers in Fremont (ns2), Atlanta (ns3), Dallas (ns1) and Newark (ns4). If your own linode goes down then there's a good chance that one of the other DNS servers is still up :-)

But why as secondaries vs as primaries? You get the same redundancy by using their servers exclusively.

@CybrMatt:

But why as secondaries vs as primaries? You get the same redundancy by using their servers exclusively.

What if you need some advanced feature Linode's DNS manager doesn't support, or you just like running your own DNS server?

@mnordhoff:

@CybrMatt:

But why as secondaries vs as primaries? You get the same redundancy by using their servers exclusively.

What if you need some advanced feature Linode's DNS manager doesn't support, or you just like running your own DNS server?

Advanced features likely won't benefit you in this case, since Linode's servers are unlikely to support the features as secondaries. It depends on whether the limitation is with the manager or with the server backend itself.

If you like running your own, well, that's a fair argument, but it doesn't seem to be the kind of thing someone would need recommended to them. I assume you'd already realize you want to run your own without asking people. :)

@CybrMatt:

Advanced features likely won't benefit you in this case, since Linode's servers are unlikely to support the features as secondaries. It depends on whether the limitation is with the manager or with the server backend itself.

I'm pretty sure that if it can be represented in a bind zonefile, Linode's servers can handle it.

I'm actually thinking of switching to a hybrid solution like this, because I need to serve up some ipv6 ptr records.

@Jay:

I'm actually thinking of switching to a hybrid solution like this, because I need to serve up some ipv6 ptr records.

You can enter IPv6 forward (AAAA) records in the Linode DNS manager for the forward lookups, though for the rDNS entries you will need to either 1) run your own name server for the rDNS zone or 2) run your own name server and create a slave zone for the rDNS to the Linode DNS server or 3) use a third party service. Since the rDNS is separate from the forward lookups, the forward lookup DNS servers can be different than the rDNS servers.

@CybrMatt:

@sweh:

Using linode's servers as secondaries gives you redundancy; they have DNS servers in Fremont (ns2), Atlanta (ns3), Dallas (ns1) and Newark (ns4). If your own linode goes down then there's a good chance that one of the other DNS servers is still up :-)

But why as secondaries vs as primaries? You get the same redundancy by using their servers exclusively.

Off the top of my head… you don't want to use a web GUI to manage your zone; your zone is programmatically generated; you want other people (who have access to your server) to be able to manage their zone without giving then linode control panel access; you actually keep your master zone file on your home machine and rsync it to your linode when you change it; …

There's more reasons than just the redundancy question.

And as for redundancy, you're wrong. It's possible for a linode DNS server to go down but your linode remain up and working; hey, it's just another server so can suffer downtime!

@CybrMatt:

But why as secondaries vs as primaries? You get the same redundancy by using their servers exclusively.
Because in my case, the DNS records are managed via Virtualmin. I find it easier to operate this way and still get the redundancy I need.

@sweh:

And as for redundancy, you're wrong. It's possible for a linode DNS server to go down but your linode remain up and working; hey, it's just another server so can suffer downtime!

How am I wrong?

Of course it's possible for a Linode DNS server to go down… but are you aware (as someone already pointed out in this thread) that Linode has multiple DNS servers in their different datacenters? The possibility of multiple DCs going offline, or all the DNS hosts going offline at once, all while a single linode stays up is astronomical. That's the whole point of redundancy.

4 linode secondary DNS servers and your own machine as a primary DNS server = 5 active servers. That's clearly more redundancy than 4 servers if they can independently fail. I described one failure mode where that situation provides more redundancy than just using the linode servers.

Now a DIFFERENT question is whether this is overkill and useless, but that's not what you said; "You get the same redundancy by using their servers exclusively." That's wrong, as demonstrated. You get redundancy in both solutions but not the same redundancy.

I vote against the use of free 3rd party and some of the paid DNS services due to that fact many of them are outdated and are vulnerable to things such as DNS poisoning. Using your domain register would be MUCH safer.

Why do you believe that your registrar's DNS system is any more up-to-date than a 3rd party's system? I'd actually guess the other way around: someone dedicated to providing a paid DNS service is far more likely to keep current than a registrar.

I am using dnsmadeasy and appreciate the failover between linodes in Dallas and Newark.