Problem adding A entry

Sorry to hear about your experience, but during certain hours of the day, the forum 'population' may or may not be available to assist you instantantly, it most certainly was not due to anyone ignoring your post (just my $0.02 )

Should be a piece of cake, log into WHM, and go to the DNS Functions section, select Edit A DNS Zone.

Select the domain from the right hand side, probably reads 'avissoftware.com'.

{note: if you see a separate DNS Zone for ns.avissoftware.com in that list, these directions may not work as advertised, also, if you can't get this to work, I can do it for you for free (and show you what I did)}

When the DNS Zone appears, scroll down, and you should see a line that reads:
ns 14400 IN A 72.36.203.162

Change that ns to ns1 (and make sure IP is correct.). Then double check the top line, where it reads:

@ 14400 IN SOA ns.avissoftware.com (dot email thing)

IF IF IF ns.avissoftware.com is there, change that to read ns1.avissoftware.com (it MUST be a valid domain).

Then SAVE the record. Then go to the Server Setup section and select Edit Setup, scroll down and find where ns.avissoftware.com is in the field, and change it to ns1.avissoftware.com. SAVE configuration.

Restart BIND. Should work. Disclaimer: I did say should :D, there is a chance that I missed something, but it just worked on my test box.

 

Just a note,
You should also setup your child nameservers with your registrar.

 

It should. I am not sure why your admin decided to make completely separate DNS zones for each subdomain, I would have just put them all as A records in the avissoftware.com DNS zone (if I am missing a good reason to do this, someone please let me know! )... but, if you change the ns.avissoftware.com DNS zone to ns1.avissoftware everywhere it exists in that zone, ensure that it is assigned the right IP address, restart bind, and it should be recognized. Just a note, however, the IP address that is currently associated with the name server in your registrar's database for ns1.avissoftware.com does not match what you posted above, in fact it is a 209.xx.xxx.xx address. (nslookup). If this is not correct, you will need to contact your registrar and have the proper IP address listed for their DNS server record. Good luck.

 

Gotcha! :D



Edit: lol, this post was posted after linux-image's post below.

 

once the domains are all moved to the new server, you can change the ns1 to point to the new server. the ns and ns2 db were created seperate, as he had given the nameservers as this at the configuration of the new server.

 

also to be noted is that the new server did not have a db for the domain.com whose ns and ns2 you are mentioning is to be added as "A" at its db.

 

ns.domain.com is not a valid nameserver, per at least the following registrars:

Enom
GoDaddy

(Probably others too.)

The only allowed values are ns1. ns2, etc and dns1, dns2, etc. In fact, I know Enom will not take anything other than those values as they are not standard. Per dnsreports.com - if you hae non-standard nameservers some people will not be able to reach your site or send or receive email to you.

 

Then Enom and GoDaddy are wrong, AFAIK. You can have any valid FQDN as your nameservers. Using ns or ns1, etc, is simply a naming convention and should have no bearing whatsoever on the ability of a domain to be resolved.

 

Enom:

If you try anything else - it will not accept.

 

That may well be their requirement, however they are completely wrong in imposing it. An NS record is defined simply as a hostname with an associated A record as per the RFC governing the structure of a zone file:
http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/cgi-bin/rfc/rfc1035.html

They may have their own reason for imposing such restrictions on you, but they are breaking the RFC's and there's no reason that you cannot use any valid hostname as your nameserver names.

Indeed, have a look at /var/named/named.ca which lists the . nameservers.

 

I sent them a question as to why. Will keep you updated. Who knows, maybe there is another RFC that says different and supercedes (especially since they do that all the time )

I looked at 1035 earlier today and see the same you do.

Even weirder:

(from dnsstuff.com)

Not

as that file states.

 

Enom sent me back this response:

So, you are correct Chripy. That used to be the rules, but was changed in the last major updates of RFC's last year - but it seems not everyone has updated all listings, etc.