Round Robin

Michael Linett mike at zerowait.com
Fri Nov 26 18:05:10 UTC 1999


If you are thinking of commercially available equipment you might want to join the
discussion groups at http://www.loadbalancing.net and ask what are the best for
your particular requirements. Typically I would suggest that you steer away from
the PC based products and look into the switch based and router based products.

I hope this helps,
Michael Linett - President
Mike at zerowait.com * http://www.zerowait.com
PH 302.266.9408 FX 302.738.4302
 http://www.loadbalancing.net - The Source for information on Load Balancing
Technology
 http://www.nas-san.com - Information on Network Attached Storage and Storage Area
Networks
Mark_Andrews at iengines.com wrote:

>         The long term solution to this is to write a draft stating
>         how to use SVR records with FTP.  SVR records are ideally
>         suited for this situation.
>
>         The trick below will work though it does consume address
>         space.
>
>         You can also create 11 CNAME records for ftp.example
>
>                 ftp.example CNAME ftp1.example
>                 ftp.example CNAME ftp2.example
>                 ...
>                 ftp.example CNAME ftp10.example
>                 ftp.example CNAME ftp11.example
>
>                 ftp1.example    A       <main_server>
>                 ...
>                 ftp10.example   A       <main_server>
>                 ftp11.example   A       <backup_server>
>
>         If you do this make sure you have an up to date (8.2.2-P5)
>         version of BIND for all the servers for this zone.  We
>         introduced a bug in the handling of multiple-cnames around
>         8.1.2/8.2.  You also need to turn on multiple-cnames in
>         the options block for all thse servers.  This solution has
>         the drawback that if the ftp client is willing to try all
>         the addresses it is given you won't get automaitic failover.
>         You can alleviate this bu making ftp1.example have both
>         address ftp1 to ftp10 having main_server first and
>         backup_server second, ftp11 having the reverse order and
>         setting rrset-order for these records (not ftp.example) to
>         fixed on all the servers.
>
>         There are also commerial products from the will do this
>         sort of thing.  CISCO makes a product as do others.  Go
>         to deja.com and perform an advanced search in the forum
>         comp.protocols.dns.bind where bind-users is gatewayed to
>         find other vendors.
>
>         Mark
>
> > As bind ignores duplicate records
> > eg
> > dreamer IN A x.x.x.x
> > dreamer IN A x.x.x.x
> > and thus it is impossible to load balance based on the specs of individual ma
> > chines, would
> > proportionally multi homing a machine and thus having many records with diffe
> > ring ip
> > addresses to balance it out?
> > eg
> > machine one, daul athlon 800 2gig ram (main ftp server)
> > assign this machine ten ips
> > machine two, p200 128 ram (extra server)
> > assign this one ip
> >
> > then list A records for all ten ips and thus make machine one ten times more
> > frequently
> > accessed than machine two.
> > Is this a viable trick or is there a better way to implement load balancing?
> > cheers
> > --
> > Marek Narkiewicz, Webmaster Intercreations
> > Reply to <-marek @ intercreations . com->
> > "Ticking away, the moments that make up a dull day"
> > Pink Floyd
> > Time
> >
> >
> --
> Mark Andrews, Internet Engines Inc. / Internet Software Consortium
> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews at iengines.com







More information about the bind-users mailing list