On 01/03/2024 11:02, Jim Reid wrote:
On 1 Mar 2024, at 10:37, Greg Choules via bind-users
wrote:
In summary, Do the hard work of traffic steering somewhere else and let your
DNS resolvers deliver the chosen answer. Don't make the resolvers themselves
try to do this on the basis of
> On 1 Mar 2024, at 10:37, Greg Choules via bind-users
> wrote:
>
> In summary, Do the hard work of traffic steering somewhere else and let your
> DNS resolvers deliver the chosen answer. Don't make the resolvers themselves
> try to do this on the basis of incomplete information.
Well said
2nd $beverage consumed.
I have never liked sortlist since I inherited it 16 years ago in my
previous job.
For me it suffers from at least one fundamental problem:
- If a client, say at location "1", is given a bunch of sorted A records
with the server at location "1" first, what does the client
Hi there,
On Fri, 1 Mar 2024, Matus UHLAR wrote:
On 01.03.24 08:24, Ond?ej Sur? wrote:
> The "sortlist" option allows to define a complicated rules when and
> how to reorder the resource records in the responses. The same
> caveats as with the "rrset-order" apply - relying on any specific
>
On 01.03.24 08:24, Ondřej Surý wrote:
The "sortlist" option allows to define a complicated rules when and
how to reorder the resource records in the responses. The same
caveats as with the "rrset-order" apply - relying on any specific
order of resource records in the DNS responses is wrong.
We
Hello,
In line with ISC's deprecation policy, I am notifying the mailing list
of our intent to deprecate the "sortlist" options and a value "fixed"
for "rrset-order" option.
These options allow to specify a on order of the resource records
in the responses.
The "fixed" value for "rrset-order"
6 matches
Mail list logo
