Help with unresolvable domain (subdomain, actually)

[Mark Andrews]

In message <AD175C30-F2BD-4456-BB7F-F0D53F65D225 at cornell.edu>, John Wobus write
s:
> >> Then the load balancer should return default records or 0.0.0.0/:: to
> >> indicate the name is good but doesn't currently have a address.
> > I like that solution, actually. Even if the client doesn't recognize  
> > it
> > as a "special" address, hopefully if it tries to connect to it, the
> > packet won't make it past the first router or switch hop...
> >
> > Has anyone proposed this to the load-balancer vendors?
> 
> Isn't this just a specific instance of configuring a load balancer's
> fallback address?  E.g., when server A and B are both down, give  
> address of
> server C.  Some load balancers allow configuration of a server D to
> be used only if C is down as well.  Address C or D could be configured
> to be 0.0.0.0 and configured with no test for "up-ness".
> 
> (Not that I'm completely happy with 0.0.0.0 or any other address that
> local folks could conceivably have figured out some crazy use for.)

0.0.0.0, means I don't know my address.  If you see packets on the
wire with 0.0.0.0, which you do at boot time, the machine that sent
them doesn't know its IP address yet.
 
> John
> _______________________________________________
> bind-users mailing list
> bind-users at lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka at isc.org