RE: [LUG] BIND and non 255.255.255.0 netmasks.

[John Horne <J.Horne at plymouth.ac.uk>]

On 29-Nov-00 at 13:35:55 Alex Charrett wrote:
> Having digested John and Simon's mails, I think I am perhaps creating
> problems here as I cannot be delegated to.    As far as I am aware the IP
> range in question are private addresses and this network is only connected
> to the net via a web proxy.
> 
Ah - I never quite know if people are using private addresses because they
really are using them or simply as examples :-) If you *are* using private
addresses then you own the entire range - or at least whoever runs your
network/nameserver does :-)

Don't think of it as a 'problem' - its a learning experience :-)

> The only nameserver on the whole network is the one I am working on.
> 
> I assume then, that somehow I need to create a higher level recordset and
> delegate the appropriate address space to myself?
> 
In short 'yes'. You would have separate files for the delegated bits
with the appropriate subnet masks. However, as someone else mentioned before,
and especially since you control the network, then why go to the bother of
subnetting on non 8bit boundaries? It is more of a hassle, but it can be
done (obviously). If you want to learn about it then doing it is obviously
the best way :-) But if you don't need it for a good reason then yup it may
be more hassle than its worth.

John.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Horne, University of Plymouth, UK           Tel: +44 (0)1752 233914
E-mail: jhorne at plymouth.ac.uk
PGP key available from public key servers
--
lug-list - The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG
Mail majordomo at lists.termisoc.org with "unsubscribe lug-list" in the
message body to unsubscribe.