Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 17:14:21 -0500 From: "Louis A. Mamakos" <louie@TransSys.COM> To: Andre Oppermann <oppermann@pipeline.ch> Cc: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu>, John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Please help spread the CVSup mirror load more evenly Message-ID: <200001212214.RAA02259@whizzo.transsys.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 21 Jan 2000 23:06:40 %2B0100." <3888D870.2416BFE8@pipeline.ch> References: <XFMail.000121104339.jdp@polstra.com> <v04210101b4ae72ec9d9f@[128.113.24.47]> <3888D870.2416BFE8@pipeline.ch>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Maybe you should make cvsup.freebsd.org as a rotary (of sorts), > > which returns a different IP address based on the callers IP > > address. (or is that even possible?) That way, any given > > host will always try the same cvsup server, but you'll be > > spreading the load out among the servers. > > Thats not so easy. What about this: > > cvsup IN CNAME cvsup1.freebsd.org. > cvsup IN CNAME cvsup2.freebsd.org. > cvsup IN CNAME cvsup3.freebsd.org. > cvsup IN CNAME cvsup4.freebsd.org. > cvsup IN CNAME cvsup5.freebsd.org. > cvsup IN CNAME cvsup6.freebsd.org. > cvsup IN CNAME cvsup7.freebsd.org. > cvsup IN CNAME cvsup8.freebsd.org. This is wrong two ways. First, the data associated with a CNAME is supposed to be the cannonical name of a host, and not another domain name with only a CNAME resource record. Second, a domain name can at most a single CNAME record associated with it, and other other record types. BIND will (should) barf on a zone file containing the example you listed. > If you simply put "cvsup.freebsd.org" into your supfile you'll get > randomly one of them. This should spread the load fairly well. If > you want a special one then simply put "cvsupX.freebsd.org" into > you supfile. You could play some DNS games to get this effect, though it's not clear what the randomness of the list of resource records is supposed to be. Certain the DNS protocol doesn't define any randomness. > I don't see any appearant reson (short of network connectivity) that > one *needs* to get always the *same* server. See previous mesasge from John regarding doing two successive updates where the servers are not synchronized with the same version files. Is this really a problem that demands solutions this complicated? The solution isn't necessarily a technological one; a simple email message reminding people of other servers might be sufficient :-) louie To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200001212214.RAA02259>