Nick wrote on 02/12/2013 10:00:27 PM: > We have a pair of DNS servers running BIND behind a direct routing LVS > director pair running keepalived. Let's call these two DNS servers A > and B, and the VIP V.
Several years ago I was lucky enough to take the ISC class on bind. One of my questions going into the class was about using a load balancer in front to our name servers. We have two VMs for internal resolution and two more for external. The instructor said not to use a load balancer as the DNS protocol had the resilience to handle a server going down and the load balancer adds to the complexity of troubleshooting problems. We had never had a problem with either BIND crashing or network issues making them all unavailable, so the load balancer was really a solution looking for a problem. Recently, we had to take the slave name servers (1 internal, 1 external) down to move the VMs to a different storage pool. There were no issues with everyone continuing to use the masters only. My current goals are to restructure our DNS, but load balancing is not in the future here. -- Bill Confidentiality Notice: This electronic message and any attachments may contain confidential or privileged information, and is intended only for the individual or entity identified above as the addressee. If you are not the addressee (or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the addressee), or if this message has been addressed to you in error, you are hereby notified that you may not copy, forward, disclose or use any part of this message or any attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail or telephone and delete this message from your system. _______________________________________________ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list bind-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
