multiple-cnames support in 8.2.2-P5

[Schaefer, Paul A]

>I believe all versions of BIND 8 still support multiple-cnames, but the
>option is terminated with extreme prejudice in BIND 9.

>In the long term, SRV records should give you the weighting capability
>you desire.


>- Kevin

On p. 411 in my 3rd edition of DNS and Bind, it says:
"Unfortunately, we don't know of any clients that support the SRV record
yet"

That sounds bad.  I think the SRV record might possibly solve my problem
somehow but it would have to work.  In the 2+ years since the 3rd edition
came out, has support for SRV has become pretty standard?  


>ray at doubleclick.net wrote:

>> On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Kevin Darcy wrote:
>>
>> > Whether multiple-cnames is "evil" or not is basically irrelevant.
>> > The functionality simply isn't supported by later versions of
>> > BIND, so you need to find alternatives.
>>
>> Well, I use multiple-CNAME exactly to support "weighting" in some
>> situations (yes, better to use a load-balancer to do this but as a
>> backup to software or hardware load-balancing, the weighted method
>> is pretty useful):
>>
>> www     IN      CNAME   www1
>> www     IN      CNAME   www2
>> www     IN      CNAME   www3
>>
>> www1    IN      A       192.168.1.10
>> www2    IN      A       192.168.2.20
>> www3    IN      A       192.168.2.20
>>
>> Above would result in 2x the traffic (or 66%) going to 192.168.2.20,
>> and 1x traffic (33%) directed to 192.168.1.10. We could change the
>> RRset ordering in named.conf from round-robin to random also ...
>>
>> Is this support ("multiple-cnames yes" in named.conf options section)
>> retained in BIND 8.2.2-P7 or 8.2.3-P* ???
>>
>> --
>> Ray