Is it possible to configure a DNS nameserver so that when performing a
domain name resolution instead of returning the IP address of the
nameserver authoritative for the corresponding child zone, it would
return its domain name. For example, is it possible to have a NS
record in a DNS resolution table
(e.g. US. NS A.GTLD.BIZ.)
without a corresponding A record and simply get A.GTLD.BIZ domain
name when resolving us. domain?

The reason for this question is to figure out whether it's possible to
have a name resolution system that would be an overlay to the existing
DNS and could be deployed using standard DNS software?

Sergei

<silentser@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1181396926.203384.28130@h2g2000hsg.googlegrou ps.com...

> Is it possible to configure a DNS nameserver so that when performing a
> domain name resolution instead of returning the IP address of the
> nameserver authoritative for the corresponding child zone, it would
> return its domain name. For example, is it possible to have a NS
> record in a DNS resolution table
> (e.g. US. NS A.GTLD.BIZ.)
> without a corresponding A record and simply get A.GTLD.BIZ domain
> name when resolving us. domain?

That is already what you get. What's the problem?


> The reason for this question is to figure out whether it's possible to
> have a name resolution system that would be an overlay to the existing
> DNS and could be deployed using standard DNS software?

Totally possible. But why break the existing structure? Wouldn't it be
easier to use a different address class, or different records types?

Groetjes,
Maarten Wiltink

On Jun 9, 9:21 pm, "Maarten Wiltink" <maar...@kittensandcats.net>
wrote:
> <silent...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1181396926.203384.28130@h2g2000hsg.googlegrou ps.com...
>
> > Is it possible to configure a DNS nameserver so that when performing a
> > domain name resolution instead of returning the IP address of the
> > nameserver authoritative for the corresponding child zone, it would
> > return its domain name. For example, is it possible to have a NS
> > record in a DNS resolution table
> > (e.g. US. NS A.GTLD.BIZ.)
> > without a corresponding A record and simply get A.GTLD.BIZ domain
> > name when resolving us. domain?
>
> That is already what you get. What's the problem?

>
> > The reason for this question is to figure out whether it's possible to
> > have a name resolution system that would be an overlay to the existing
> > DNS and could be deployed using standard DNS software?
>
> Totally possible. But why break the existing structure? Wouldn't it be
> easier to use a different address class, or different records types?
>
> Groetjes,
> Maarten Wiltink

Dank u!
The problem is that I can't check whether I get it or not. When I've
installed BIND on my MacBook, since both at home and in the university
I'm connected to the Internet via routers that have a DNS server, no
matter what I define as "DNS Servers" in my network configuration the
resolution requests do not get to my local DNS server. As result I
can't try it on my own.

Concerning your note on "breaking the existing structure". I'm not
thinking about using it for domain name resolution. I'm interested in
how it works in case of Object Name Services (ONS) that is expected to
resolve product codes stored in RFID tags into URLs of services that
can provide detailed information about tagged items. The product code
is stored as {producer_code.product_code.item_code} and in order to be
resolved is rewritten as a domain name
item_code.product_code.producer_code.sgtin.id.onse pc.com. At
sgtin.id.onsepc.com the producer_code is resolved into domain name of
the producer and the producer's nameserver resolves product_code into
the URL of the service (using NAPTR record). It is clear that the
producer can do the resolution using BIND. But I'm interested in how
is it done at sgtin.id.onsepc.com? Can you use BIND for that as well?

And considering your last remark: What did you mean by saying
"Wouldn't it be easier to use different address class, or different
records types"? Could you please specify in more detail?

Sergei

In article <1181488013.485373.109600@k79g2000hse.googlegroups .com>,
silentser@gmail.com wrote:

> On Jun 9, 9:21 pm, "Maarten Wiltink" <maar...@kittensandcats.net>
> wrote:
> > <silent...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:1181396926.203384.28130@h2g2000hsg.googlegrou ps.com...
> >
> > > Is it possible to configure a DNS nameserver so that when performing a
> > > domain name resolution instead of returning the IP address of the
> > > nameserver authoritative for the corresponding child zone, it would
> > > return its domain name. For example, is it possible to have a NS
> > > record in a DNS resolution table
> > > (e.g. US. NS A.GTLD.BIZ.)
> > > without a corresponding A record and simply get A.GTLD.BIZ domain
> > > name when resolving us. domain?
> >
> > That is already what you get. What's the problem?
>
> >
> > > The reason for this question is to figure out whether it's possible to
> > > have a name resolution system that would be an overlay to the existing
> > > DNS and could be deployed using standard DNS software?
> >
> > Totally possible. But why break the existing structure? Wouldn't it be
> > easier to use a different address class, or different records types?
> >
> > Groetjes,
> > Maarten Wiltink
>
> Dank u!
> The problem is that I can't check whether I get it or not. When I've
> installed BIND on my MacBook, since both at home and in the university
> I'm connected to the Internet via routers that have a DNS server, no
> matter what I define as "DNS Servers" in my network configuration the
> resolution requests do not get to my local DNS server. As result I
> can't try it on my own.

What happens when you do:

dig whatever @127.0.0.1 +norec

>
> Concerning your note on "breaking the existing structure". I'm not
> thinking about using it for domain name resolution. I'm interested in
> how it works in case of Object Name Services (ONS) that is expected to
> resolve product codes stored in RFID tags into URLs of services that
> can provide detailed information about tagged items. The product code
> is stored as {producer_code.product_code.item_code} and in order to be
> resolved is rewritten as a domain name
> item_code.product_code.producer_code.sgtin.id.onse pc.com. At
> sgtin.id.onsepc.com the producer_code is resolved into domain name of
> the producer and the producer's nameserver resolves product_code into
> the URL of the service (using NAPTR record). It is clear that the
> producer can do the resolution using BIND. But I'm interested in how
> is it done at sgtin.id.onsepc.com? Can you use BIND for that as well?

You're talking about how the eventual resource record is processed.
What does this have to do with your original request for a way to get NS
records without corresponding A records for the servers? Don't you need
to know the servers' addresses so that you can use the NS records?

> And considering your last remark: What did you mean by saying
> "Wouldn't it be easier to use different address class, or different
> records types"? Could you please specify in more detail?
>
> Sergei

--
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***

<silentser@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1181488013.485373.109600@k79g2000hse.googlegr oups.com...

> [...] When I've installed BIND on my MacBook, since both at home and
> in the university I'm connected to the Internet via routers that have
> a DNS server, no matter what I define as "DNS Servers" in my network
> configuration the resolution requests do not get to my local DNS
> server. As result I can't try it on my own.

Are you querying outside servers, and expecting them to ask your
DNS server for something, anything? None of them have any reason to.

Make your local server authoritative for some zone of your own
devising, and query your server for it directly. And don't 'borrow'
someone else's domain name, use something like 'ons.silentser.local.'
that is guaranteed not to clash with anything out in the open.


> [...] What did you mean by saying "Wouldn't it be easier to use
> different address class, or different records types"? Could you
> please specify in more detail?

You mentioned NS and A records. There are others, and you can define
and use your own. How, I don't know. I suggest you read lots and lots
of documentation.

Groetjes,
Maarten Wiltink