Maximum number of DNS servers

[Jeremy Porter]

Unfortunately that is how SQL database are designed, as per the spec.
While logically an 8 bit value would be fine, the database specification
language defines it in decimal digits, or 3.5 bits.
Since this constraint exists one needs to consider it.

I can't see any realistic need for more than 9 name servers
for in-addr.arpa, since  in-addr.arpa usage is a secondary function
and not an area where people are even trying to do funky things with
dns.


In message <20000426173511.A22485 at ultra.net>, Joe Provo - Network Architect writes
:
>On Wed, Apr 26, 2000 at 04:19:05PM -0400, Shane Kerr wrote:
>> I'm working on some of the requirements for the new system, and I had a
>> quick question:  we can either use a 1 or 2 digit number to order
>> IN-ADDR.ARPA servers in our database.  Can anyone think of a reason to
>> need more than 10 servers?
>
>I'm not certain if any studies have been made regarding any "ceilings of
>effectiveness" for NS delegation.  Barring any such technical difficulty
>or BCP quoting a number beyond which it becomes stupid to add more, I'm
>stunned that such an arbitrary limit would even be considered.  Should I
>ask why the database system case how many digits [character
>representations] there are rather than a true value [bit-size of the
>actual value].  
>
>Just because I can't think of a need for more than 5-7 for a given
>netblock doesn't mean someone else won't.  If you have to make this kind
>of arbitrary, display-oriented (rather than value-oriented) cutoff,
>Internet experience dictates to go with the larger of your choices.  
>
>Cheers,
>
>Joe
>--
>Joe Provo                                            Voice  508.486.7471
>Director, Internet Planning & Design                 Fax    508.229.2375
>Network Deployment & Management, RCN                 <joe.provo at rcn.com>
>

--- jerry at fc.net
Director Network Operations/Network Engineering, Wayport, Inc.
512-519-6193 www.wayport.net
8303 Mopac Expressway Suite A300, Austin Tx.