intelligent selection of forwarders?
jim at rfc1035.com
Thu Aug 15 21:19:56 UTC 2002
>>>>> "James" == James Ralston <qralston+ml.bind-workers at andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
James> Honestly, we don't care a whole lot about the
James> load-balancing aspect of this feature (i.e., BIND finding
James> the best forwarder to use). What we *do* care about is
James> having rapid failover from a failed forwarding server.
Er, I might be asking the obvious question but why would you *ever*
configure a name server to forward queries to an unreliable target?
Wouldn't it be a lot simpler to just get rid of forwarding altogether
and have your name server find out the good and bad name servers for
itself by following NS records?
More information about the bind-workers