Colin Percival wrote:
RW wrote:
With portsnap the default server is itself one of the servers on the
SRV list, so portsnap should fall-back to a working server even when
DNS is unavailable (behind a proxy) or screwed-up by a router etc.

I dont see a reason why update.FreeBSD.org shouldn't have the
same A-record as update1.FreeBSD.org, so that it "just works".

With portsnap, I asked for the A record to be created not as a fallback
for people with broken DNS, but instead as a backwards compatibility
mechanism for people who were running old versions of portsnap which
didn't do SRV lookups.  To be honest, I didn't realize that there were
so many people with broken DNS resolution.

I'll ask the FreeBSD DNS admins to add an A record for update.freebsd.org.

Colin Percival

I had up until now been transparently benefiting from that
"non-fallback" legacy A record for portsnap as well.

Thanks for looking into this. I am personally amazed that an issue
caused by a misconfiguration on my end could result in changes on the
FreeBSD DNS servers to avoid similar issues for others. Kudos to FreeBSD
support!


_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to