Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 09:49:19 +1000 (EST) From: Colin Campbell <sgcccdc@citec.qld.gov.au> To: Jeff Lasman <jblists@nobaloney.net> Cc: <freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Using DNAT and DNS round-robin Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.33.0112170945380.23989-100000@guru.citec.qld.gov.au> In-Reply-To: <3C1D0EF1.783B48AD@nobaloney.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, On Sun, 16 Dec 2001, Jeff Lasman wrote: > Derrick John Klise wrote: > > > IIRC, something like: > > > > monkey.example.net IN A 192.168.0.1 > > IN A 192.168.0.2 > > IN A 192.168.0.3 > > Thanks. Finally found it on page 259 of DNS and Bind. > > > > Is there a way to handle high-availability strictly in DNS? > > > > Possibly; I'm unaware of one if there is, though. > > > > If you're not too worried about the TTL problem, you could set up a monitoring > > program to remove an entry from the rotation if it's corresponding address > > becomes unavailable, then add it when it comes back up. > > That's exactly what we're planning on. Along with very low TTL. Won't > help with AOL, Earthlink, etc., though <frown>. There used to be (still is? - cou;dn't find it) a paper on the ISC web site (www.isc.org) exlpaining why using DNS for HA was pointless. If memory serves, the main reasons were - most browsers cache DNS lookups and so a system that goes down will simply appear as unreachable to the browser. - most browsers ignore TTLs. Colin To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.33.0112170945380.23989-100000>