"McWebber" <mcweb...@my-deja.com> wrote in message

> "Marc Bissonnette" <drag...@internalysis.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns93BAB7CA032A3dragnetinternalysisc@207.35.177.134...
> > "McWebber" <mcweb...@my-deja.com> wrote in
> > news:vxSdndTmk4aeL4iiU-KYgg@comcast.com:
> > > A year ago in

> > > od.itd.earthlink.net&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain she claimed they were
> > > going to have redundant DNS. Right now, all of their DNS is still in
> > > the same room. I wouldn't call that redundant.

> > For anyone looking for truly redundant - i.e. reliable / safe then yes,
> > you are correct - each DNS server should be in a separate physical
> > location. By the strict definition of the word, though, if she's got
> > multiple DNS servers on multiple machines, her claim is accurate
> > (Actually, I suppose you could claim multiple DNS server daemons on a
> > single machine is also 'redundant', but that's _really_ stretching
it...)

> Yeah, I thought it was funny that they used to have ns1 and ns2 and now
they
> have north, south, east and west as if they're in different parts of the
> world. A trace shows the last hop before all of them is the same IP so
they
> could certainly be on the same machine. And the rDNS is a bit messed up.