Why use FQDN as DNS-server option in DHCP?

Posted by Filip Haglund on Server Fault See other posts from Server Fault or by Filip Haglund
Published on 2013-06-24T16:02:28Z Indexed on 2013/06/24 16:24 UTC
Read the original article Hit count: 320

Filed under:
|
|
|
|

I've seen multiple default configurations of DHCP-servers with a FQDN set as the DNS-server option. Doesn't this imply a catch-22, or the need for that DNS-server to be in the hosts file of every single client?

example from dhcp3-server in debian 6:
option domain-name-servers ns1.internal.example.org;

I can see how using a dns name is convenient because it's only an A-record to change, and they can be load balanced if wanted, but I don't see how the client is going to resolve the name.

Why are people using FQDN's as DNS-server addresses in DHCP?

© Server Fault or respective owner

Related posts about dns

Related posts about dhcp