Re: round-robin question
On 30-Oct-2008, at 13:34 , Bryan Irvine wrote: Creative I must admit, but doesn't work. Is there another way to get this working perhaps with? Even if you can get BIND to hand out more than one identical record (I wouldn't expect that to work), the balance of load is dependant on the clients' algorithms for choosing an A record.. and the clients may not do what you want or expect. Some clients are semi-random, some rotate through the A records they get, and some cache and keep the first one they pick. I don't believe there's any reliable way to do this kind of traffic engineering with DNS. If you need to shift load around in very specific ways, then you should look at actual load balancing hardware/ software to do the job.
Re: round-robin question
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Matthew Pounsett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 30-Oct-2008, at 13:34 , Bryan Irvine wrote: Creative I must admit, but doesn't work. Is there another way to get this working perhaps with? Even if you can get BIND to hand out more than one identical record (I wouldn't expect that to work), the balance of load is dependant on the clients' algorithms for choosing an A record.. and the clients may not do what you want or expect. Some clients are semi-random, some rotate through the A records they get, and some cache and keep the first one they pick. Yeah but is it even possible to give more than one identical record? I don't believe there's any reliable way to do this kind of traffic engineering with DNS. If you need to shift load around in very specific ways, then you should look at actual load balancing hardware/software to do the job. Yeah he really does need a real load balancer. He's just trying this as a temporary solution. -B
Re: round-robin question
As a long term solution you might want to look at F5's GTM solution if you really want to load balance using DNS. It does exactly what you are looking for but with TONS of bells and whistles. Using a standard DNS server to load balance effectively is a fools errand. You only have control of part of the conversation and unfortunately the part that you don't have control over is where the decision is actually made. On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 11:10 AM, Bryan Irvine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Matthew Pounsett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 30-Oct-2008, at 13:34 , Bryan Irvine wrote: Creative I must admit, but doesn't work. Is there another way to get this working perhaps with? Even if you can get BIND to hand out more than one identical record (I wouldn't expect that to work), the balance of load is dependant on the clients' algorithms for choosing an A record.. and the clients may not do what you want or expect. Some clients are semi-random, some rotate through the A records they get, and some cache and keep the first one they pick. Yeah but is it even possible to give more than one identical record? I don't believe there's any reliable way to do this kind of traffic engineering with DNS. If you need to shift load around in very specific ways, then you should look at actual load balancing hardware/software to do the job. Yeah he really does need a real load balancer. He's just trying this as a temporary solution. -B -- Google for President YouTube for VP in any year divisible by 4
Re: round-robin question
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 10:34:55AM -0700, Bryan Irvine wrote: I've got a client using round-robin, and in an attempt to make more of the load go to one particular server he added multiple a records with the same IP. In 10 years you might be able to do it with an SRV record. On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 02:32:18PM -0400, Dave Sparro wrote: If Multiple identical A records didn't work, and you have some extra IPs to burn, I would try assigning multiple, IP addresses to server with more capacity. Note that you can do that without an additional network card: interface aliases. Justin
Re: round-robin question
On Oct 30 2008, Bryan Irvine wrote: On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Matthew Pounsett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 30-Oct-2008, at 13:34 , Bryan Irvine wrote: Creative I must admit, but doesn't work. Is there another way to get this working perhaps with? Even if you can get BIND to hand out more than one identical record (I wouldn't expect that to work), the balance of load is dependant on the clients' algorithms for choosing an A record.. and the clients may not do what you want or expect. Some clients are semi-random, some rotate through the A records they get, and some cache and keep the first one they pick. Yeah but is it even possible to give more than one identical record? You can specify them in the zone file, but duplicates are removed when BIND reads them, so it's quite useless. You can't get BIND to return duplicate RRs in response to a query. I don't believe there's any reliable way to do this kind of traffic engineering with DNS. If you need to shift load around in very specific ways, then you should look at actual load balancing hardware/software to do the job. Yeah he really does need a real load balancer. He's just trying this as a temporary solution. We always refer to this as poor man's load balancing. -- Chris Thompson Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: round-robin question
On Oct 30, 2008, at 10:34 AM, Bryan Irvine wrote: I've got a client using round-robin, and in an attempt to make more of the load go to one particular server he added multiple a records with the same IP. www INA 1.2.3.4 www INA 1.2.3.5 www INA 1.2.3.6 www INA 1.2.3.6 Can that third machine run a second IP address, say, 1.2.3.6 + 1.2.3.7 ? Then you could use.. www IN A 1.2.3.4 www IN A 1.2.3.5 www IN A 1.2.3.6 www IN A 1.2.3.7
