Glue records (was Re: ATTN GARY KLINE)

Jonathan McKeown j.mckeown at
Mon Nov 8 08:18:14 UTC 2010

On Friday 05 November 2010 22:51:01 Robert Bonomi wrote:
> > From owner-freebsd-questions at  Fri Nov  5 02:26:31 2010
> > From: Jonathan McKeown <j.mckeown at>
> > To: freebsd-questions at
> > Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 10:27:38 +0200
> > Subject: Glue records (was Re: ATTN GARY KLINE)
> >
> > When a nameserver delegates a zone, it's not responsible for any of that
> > zone's records any more, with two exceptions. It provides NS records to
> > indicate which nameservers /are/ responsible, and it retains
> > responsibility for the A records of nameservers inside the zone - and
> > only those nameservers. (That's glue.)
> >
> > There's no way a .com nameserver should be providing A records for hosts
> > in the .au zone.
> sure there is.
>    Domain:  (an aussie company)
>       nameservers,

I think we're agreeing violently ;) The nameservers for the .com zone, when 
asked about, should reply with the hostnames of the two nameservers. 
It shouldn't reply with their IP addresses; the only nameservers that can do 
that are the ones serving the .au zone or the and zones.

> They're still wrong to bw whinging about a lack o glue records.
> glue is needed _only_ when the nameserver is _in_ the domain it is the
> authoritative servr for.
> So, in the above frivolous example, does *NOT* need any glue
> records, but if is an authoritative server for
>, then *it* needs a glue record for that domain.

Well, the glue record will be ``above the cut'': if .au delegates, it's the .au nameserver that provides the A record for; but, yes.

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list