在新闻组看到一个帖子，是关于内部、外部域名部署得问题，也是很老的话题，不过 Ace Fekay [MVP] 总结的也还算全面，这里原文照贴一下。

In news:e6r%23kjfoGHA.1600@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl,
Anthony <anthony.spam@spammedout.com> stated, which I commented on below:
> This question went astray the first time. Its a well worn question,
> but Id like to see if there are any new thoughts on this. I am
> looking at the naming strategy for a new forest. I am aware of the
> discussions about the alternative strategies: non-valid; non-public
> and public domains. I cant see a really good reason not to use the
> public domain name as the starting off point for AD domain naming.
> The usual reason for using a private namespace like ad.myco.local is
> that it wont be released to public dns servers. But if the internal
> version of myco.com was accidentally released, it would just contain
> a delegation to an unreachable internal dns server. Not a huge
> problem. Using a non-public namespace like ad.myco.net keeps things tidy
> if:
> there is a very large public presence at myco.com. It would have to
> be a very large public presence not to have room for ad.myco.com. Its
> fine if there is a clear split between internal and external, but
> gets a bit confusing when it comes to the extranet with partners,
> customers etc. Should they use support.myco.com or support.myco.net?
> If you use a public namespace, you need to maintain two versions, the
> external list of public resources and the internal one. But you
> already need to maintain two lists if you use a different namespace.
> Its just that the two lists have two different names. It should not
> be too difficult for a dns admin to remember that he has two versions
> of one list rather than two lists.
> So, unless you are very very small, or very very large, I cant see a
> good reason not just to use the one namespace. Then your security
> comes down to layers of access control between public and private
> information, rather than a global internal/external split.
> Does anyone have anything new to add?
> AnthonyInteresting question that has been around forever and re-hashed since the
beta days of Windows 2000. Read thru this old discussion. Im sure it covers
just about everything youll want to know.

=================================
Same name AD DNS domain name and external name (split-zone)
I must say this is a classic question that stems back to the beginning days
of AD. Naming your internal domain name can be based on a number of things,
whether technical or political, or previous administrative experience. This
has been highly discussed (not debated) in the past. Whatever decision you
make for an AD DNS FQDN domain name, just understand the ramifications.
Actually Im not going to try to get into any sort of debate, for there is
really nothing to debate, nor help someone decide on what is right or
wrong but rather just state the implications and how to get around them,
no matter what the decision was based on.

===========================================
The passage below is a compilation of a discussion between myself (Ace) and
Todd J. Heron, MVP, from over a year ago.
===========================================
Classic question:
"Which are the advantages of naming my domain with domain.com rather than
domain.local? I have a domain.com registered for my Company that i use for
my e-mail and Site Internet."There are different answers to this classic question and while these answers
ultimately depend upon company preference, much of the direction will be
based upon administrator experience.  The three basic scenarios outlined
below are the most commonly given answers to the question, sometimes
altogether and sometimes not.   Some company networks use a combination of
these scenarios.  When explaining it to a relative beginner asking the
question, many responses omit explanatory detail about all the scenarios,
for fear of causing more confusion.All three approaches will have to take both security and the end-user
experience into perspective.  This perspective is colored by company size,
budget, and experience of personnel running Active Directory and the network
infrastructure (mostly with respect to DNS and VPN).  No one approach should
be considered the best solution under all circumstances.  For any host name
that you wish to have access from both your internal network and from the
external Internet you need scenario 1, although it is the most DNS-intensive
over time.   If you do not select this option and go with scenario 2 or 3
only, consideration will have to be given to the fact that company end-users
will need to be trained on using different names under different
circumstances (based on where they are (at work, on the road or at home).
===========================================
Scenario 1.
Choosing the same name internal/external (spilt-zone, or split-brain,
whatever you want to call it) has the most administrative overhead. Why
chosen? Either because a misunderstanding of the pros/cons, political, or
for ease of use.Pros:
1. Their email address is their logon name. Easier to remember.
2.  Security.  Each DNS zone is authoritative for the zone of that name so
therefore the external DNS zone and internal AD/DNS zone will NOT replicate
with each other thereby prevent internal company records to be visible to
the outside Internet.
3.  Short namespace.  Users dont have to type in (or see) a long domain name when accessing company resources either internally or externally.
Names are "pretty".Cons:
1. Administrative overhead. If trying to get to your externally hosted
website, it wont resolve because a DNS server will not forward or resolve
outside for what a zone that it hosts. You can overcome resolving the
www.domain.com dilemma by using a delegation. Rt-click your zone, new
delegation, type in www and provide the public SOAs for the nameserver(s).
This way it will send the resolution request to the SOA and resolve that
way. As for http://domain.com, that is difficult and would instruct all
users to only use www.domain.com. This is because of the LdapIpAddress, the
record that shows up as (same as parent), which EACH domain controller
registers. So if you type http://domain.com, you will round robin between
the DCs. To overcome that, on EACH DC, install IIS, then under the default
website properties, redirect it to www.domain.com and let the delegation
handle it. Now if you were to be using Sharepoint services, or something
else that connects to the default website (no sub folders or virtual
directories), then it becomes a problem. I know numerous installations setup
with this and have operated fine for years.
2. Security.  Each DNS zone is authoritative for the zone of that name so
therefore the external DNS zone and internal AD/DNS zone will NOT replicate
with each other thereby prevent internal company records to be visible to
the outside Internet.
3.  Any changes made to the public DNS zone (such as the addition or removal
of an important IP host such as a web server, mail server, or VPN server)
must added manually to the internal AD/DNS zone if internal users will be
accessing these hosts from inside the network perimeter (a common
circumstance).
4.  VPN resolution is problematic at best.  Company users accessing the
network from the Internet will easily be able to reach IP hosts in the
public DNS zone but will not easily reach internal company resources inside
the network perimeter without special (and manual) workarounds such as
maintaining hosts files on their machines (which must be manually updated as
well everytime there is a change to an important IP host in the public
zone), entering internal host data on the public zone (such as for printers,
SRV records for DCs, member server hosts, etc), which exposes what internal
hosts exist, or they must use special VPN software (usually expensive), such
as Cisco, Netscreen, etc, which is more secure and reliable anyway.For further reading on this scenario:
http://www.isaserver.org/tutorials/You_Need_to_Create_a_Split_DNS.html
http://homepages.tesco.net./~J.deBoynePollard/FGA/dns-split-horizon-common-server-names.html
===========================================

Scenario 2.
Choosing a child name or delegated sub domain name of the public zone. This
is one recommendation. Name such as ad.domain.com, or
corp.microsoft.com. The AD DNS domain name namespace starts at
corp.domain.com and has nothing to do with the domain.com zone.Pros:
1. Mimimal administrative overhead.
2. Forwarding will work.
3. The NetBIOS name will be AD or CORP, depending on what you chose and
what the users will see in the three-line legacy security logon box.
4.  Like Scenario 1, this method also isolates the internal company network
but note this at the same time is also a disadvantage (see below).
5. Better than Scenario 1, internal company (Active Directory) clients can
resolve external resources in the public DNS zone easily, once proper DNS
name resolution mechanism such as forwarding, secondary zones, or delegation
zones are set up.
6. Better than Scenario 1, DNS records for the public DNS zone do not need
to be manually duplicated into the internal AD/DNS zone.
7. Better than Scenario 1, VPN clients accessing the internal company
network from the Internet can easily navigate into the internal subdomain.
It is very reliable as long as the VPN stays connected.
Cons:
1. Confusion on users if they decide on using their UPN.
2.  While there is security in an isolated subdomain, there is potential for
exposure to outside attack.  The potential for exposure of internal company
resources to the outside world, lies mainly in the fact that because when
the public zone DNS servers receives a query for
subdomain.externaldnsname.com, they will return the addresses of the
internal DNS servers which will then provide answers to that query.
3. Longer DNS namespace.  This may not look appealing (or "pretty") to the
end-users.
4. Security. We are assuming that we can only access the internal servers
thru a VPN and assuming they are in a private subnet, they won;t be
accessible. Also assuming to secure the VPN with an L2TP/IPSec solution and
not just a quick PPTP connection. If this is all so, we can assume it is
secure and not accessible from the outside world.The scenario is the recommendation from the Windows Server 2003 Deployment
Guide.  It states to the external registered name and take a sub zone from
that as  the DNS name for the Forest Root Domain:
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windowsserv/2003/all/deployguide/en-us/default.asp

===========================================
Scenario 3. Choosing a different TLD: Choosing a different TLD, such as
domain.local, domain.corp, domain.net, etc. This option is usually best for
either beginners or the expert, because its the easiest to implement
primarily because it prevents name space conflicts from the very beginning
with the public domain and requires no further action on your part with
respect to that.But this option does makes VPN resolution difficult (like option 1) and
Exchange headers when examined closely will show the company internal AD
name which looks unprofessional.  You can use any extension you want here
such as .ad, .int, .lan, etc...Pros:
1. Easy to implement with minimal administrative overhead. Requires minimal
action on administrators.
2. Prevents name space conflicts with external domain name.
3. Forwarding works.
Cons:
1. Domain name may look unprofessional.
2. VPN resolution difficult (like option 1). That can be a sticky issue and
depending on the VPN client will dictate whether it will work or not. I know
one of the other MVPs (Dean Wells) created a little script to populate a
users laptop or home PCs hosts file with the necessary resources and would
remove them once the VPN is dissolved.
3. Exchange HELO name must be altered (to accomodate anti-spam, SPF, and RBL
software), via MetaEdit, Metabase Explorer and thru the SMTP VS properties.
===========================================
For a broad overview of this entire topic, see below.DNS Namespace Planning
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;254680
Assigning the Forest Root Domain Name:
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/WindowsServ/2003/all/deployguide/en-us/Default.asp?url=/resources/documentation/WindowsServ/2003/all/deployguide/en-us/dssbc_logi_kqxm.asp
===========================================
I hope that helps