intelligent selection of forwarders?

[Mark_Andrews at isc.org]

> >>>>> "James" == James Ralston <qralston+ml.bind-workers at andrew.cmu.edu> writ
> es:
> 
>     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?
> 

	Somebody just kicked the plug and it's going to take 30 minutes
	for the first nameserver to fsck it's disks before it starts
	working again.

	Periodic maintence.

	Mostly ignoring the dead one is good under these circumstances.

	Mark
--
Mark Andrews, Internet Software Consortium
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: Mark.Andrews at isc.org