I can speculate. I suspect that your DMZ DNS servers provide DNS services to Internet users resolving names for your company’s domain name (MX, www, vpn, etc.). Assuming your DNS servers are for centrelearn.com they do not support recursion (I verified this with nslookup) so they will not work as the configured DNS servers for your DMZ servers. This means the DMZ servers are forwarding queries to the load balancer DNS in order to resolve all things on the Internet. Your predecessors may have felt this was a more secure solution than having your DMZ servers forwarding to your ISP’s DNS server(s).
To summarize: Requests from the Internet to resolve resources in the centrelearn.com namespace are forwarded to your DNZ DNS servers. The DMZ servers (www, vpn, smtp, etc.) are forwarding their DNS queries to the load balance to resolve resources on the Internet.
Colin Weaver
]]>While researching a dns issue/question I came across your post “Pondering DNS Placement” and wanted to find out if you answers a few questions.
Current Setup:
Fatpipe ISP load balancer hosting our own DNS records
Connects to our firewall external port
Firewall Optional port is where our DMZ resides
Firewall Internal port is where our private network exists
We have 2 internal DNS servers and 2 DNS servers sitting in the DMZ.
I inheritted this network 2 months ago and have been trying to map it out every since. My questions are:
1) If I am hosting my own DNS on the load balancer then what is the need to have dns servers in the dmz? If I didn’t have them there and point my dmz servers to the ISP dns then the dmz servers would resolve each others hostnames via netbios broadcast or hostfile if I chose to do so?
I’ve never really had to build DMZ DNS servers and just trying to better understand their role and what records/zones I need to have on them.
Thanks,
Mike
I have verified that this one works: http://sewelldirect.com/usbtoserial.asp
]]>Further, you can run into issues when RFC1918 spaces collide. For example, if two companies merge, and both are using 1918 space, you will likely have to renumber one of the networks. IPv6 nicely solves this problem.
]]>