More importantly though, we're not just talking number of IPs per host, there is also the number of hosts (each with a unique IP) which would avoid the UDP packet size limit, but might be a legitimate use for 1000+ records.
-- My news reader can beat up your news reader
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If I understand your question ---
Per the RFC's DNS responses are limited to 512 bytes, and DNS queries and response use a very efficient mechanism to "compress" (actually reuse) previously specified subdomains (with respect to ROOT) labels.
Bottom line: There is no way to fit 1000 resource records into a DNS response. Going from memory I think you might be at 12 bytes per resource record average so 512 / 12 = 42 and thats over inflated as it ignores overhead of the uncompressed original data, SOA record, original query which gets mirrored back, etc.
But it least you know 42 is a rediculous number of records to provide. :)
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 17:31:37 -0700
"WebDivisor Feedback" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello:
I was wondering for those of you who currently have an
active DNS system running, do you have a set limit on the number of A
records a customer can create? I really am against limits when it comes
to service, but pragmatically controlling a system with no limits or
barriers is not very programmer and processor friendly. What do you
people here on the list see as a reasonable amount of host names each
client should be able to create and manage?...
Best Regards, -H.A.
