On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 09:40:16AM -0400, Dmitri Pal wrote:
>    On 04/13/2012 11:00 PM, Brian Cook wrote:
> 
>      Yes, this is exactly what I am trying to accomplish.  I've already been
>      looking in to the BIND views clause and would like to hear if anyone has
>      any feedback as to how well this works in the real world.
>      In this case the implementation of IPA is using an external standard
>      BIND implementation loading from text files.  However, views would be
>      very useful for IPA to be able to do internally, so figuring out how to
>       get this option in to BIND using 389ds backend would be a useful step.
> 
>    AFAIK there is an SSSD RFE that allows you to define a group of primary
>    servers for a client that the client would use to fail over between and
>    only when they all are not available it will fail over to DNS. At least I
>    remember a discussion about it. It seems that such feature would
>    accomplish the same but with less work. Would it be sufficient?
> 
>    See comment 6 in the https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1128

Yes, except with the feature that Petr Spacek is proposing, the
configuration would be performed purely on server side, as I understood.

The SSSD fix would work, but would require that clients in different
"sites" have different primary servers configured. Still, doable with
puppet or something, just not as convenient.

_______________________________________________
Freeipa-users mailing list
Freeipa-users@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-users

Reply via email to