DNS roundrobin, was Re: round-robin using cnames

Harry Sufehmi Harry_Sufehmi at birmingham.gov.uk
Wed Sep 13 10:15:17 UTC 2000



This reminds me of our current dilemma.

We'll be serving our services to the public through the internet. Therefore we
have specified the server setup for it, which includes the need for load
balancing and fail over. We don't feel like buying a 10K Cisco Director for it
if DNS roundrobin will do just fine, however we have no previous experience and
can't make a firm suggestion for it.

There will be 2 webservers accessing 2 (replicated) database servers, both
webservers connected through a firewall.
A corporate DNS server (NetWare-based *gasp* although there is plan to move it
to Solaris) is available and fully operational.

Anybody here utilise that feature for their webservers? Any catch/potential
problem to be watched, especially with above configuration?



Thanks,
Harry





Kevin Darcy <kcd at daimlerchrysler.com> on 16/08/2000 21:57:53


What you're doing violates the RFC's, so it's no wonder that it doesn't work
on some slave servers. Why not just have 3 A records for "bobo" pointing to
the relevant IP addresses? That's the legal and reliable way to do this.


- Kevin

beetle bailey wrote:

> Hello, we are using the following entries:
> bobo     IN   CNAME   name1.dom.ain.
>          IN   CNAME   name2.dom.ain.
>          IN   CNAME   name3.dom.ain.
>
> to get a round-robin effect.  The problem we're seeing is on some slave
> servers all queries return the same name for bobo.  A dump of named shows
> only one value for bobo (name1 for example) which I guess explains why it's
> not cycling through the different names.  Can anyone explain why that is?
> Is that a really screwed up way of trying to  achieve something close to
> load balancing?  the master is v4.9.? whereas the slaves are all v8.2.2p5.
> Thanks for any help.











**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************



More information about the bind-users mailing list