The only problem with using DNS round robin like this, is that, in this scenario when 1 server is down, on average 1 in 3 requests to the web server will fail. But as previous posters have commented DNS should respond with the same 3 addresses, but it will rotate the order each time, in the version ( named 8.3.4-REL Sun Feb 9 01:23:18 GMT 2003 on 4.7-STABLE of the same date ) I am using it appears to return the addresses in some sort of random order at least it does for me in my test.
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003 12:09:06 -0800 "Aaron Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "Aaron Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > To my knowlege, yes. Lets say you had a server called www. > > > You would just give it two addresses in your domain configuration > > > files. > > > > > > www IN CNAME 220.127.116.11 > > > www IN CNAME 18.104.22.168 > > > www IN CNAME 22.214.171.124 > > > > That should be A records, not CNAMEs. > Err, you are correct, my mistake. > > > > > > The DNS standard will give out a different address for every > > > query. To get the address 126.96.36.199 twice, you would have > > > to make 4 unique queries for the server records. > > > > Where does the standard say that? Most servers will return the > > records in the same order each time by default, and my reading of the > > standards is that this is perfectly acceptable behaviour. > > I have personally not read the standard. It is just information > thats been given to me by some knowlegable friends. > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > -- David Dooley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Description: PGP signature