[Novalug] More fun with DNS - fixed order return

Nick Danger nick@hackermonkey.com
Sun Mar 4 13:49:07 EST 2007


Rob Payne wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 03, 2007 at 08:44:39PM -0500, James Ewing Cottrell 3rd wrote:
>   
>> [1] Why do you need a fixed order to records?
>>     
>
> I second this question.  Is it some type of load-balancing scheme?
>   

Yes, sort of a loadbalance/failover configuration. Purchased software
that I cannot change how it works. Both servers exist in seperate
locations so I cannot use a hardware load balancer which is normally my
preferred method of doing load balancing and failover.  Im not even sure
the vendor would let me use one even if I could :-) They like to argue
with me almost as much as I like to argue with them.

>> [2] Don't SVR records have a Weight, much like the priority in MX?
>>     
>
> They are SRV records, and yes they have a priority specification.
>   

Yup. A priority, a weight and a port. Its used alot in VoIP on 5060, the
SIP port for failover and loadbalancing. Unfortunately we have some old
SIP hardware that doesn't work so well with SRV records. (I did
transpose it before, its not SVR)

>> [3] Nothing is preventing you from nuking RHEL's bind and dropping in 
>> BIND 9.4 yourself
>>     
>
> True.  Create an RPM for 9.4 and run that until RHEL gets around to
> building/distributing 9.4.  If you want new BIND on any platform,
> that's generally your only option.
>   

Unfortunately thats what I think Im going to have to do. To save myself
a little grief later, I think Im going to use a completely different
chrooted location for my self compile, thereby allowing me to remove it
and add back the RPMs if they ever come around to the latest versions.

-Nick





More information about the Novalug mailing list