> Yeah. The problem with bind and other "normal" DNS software is that > they really are not designed for what we would like to have: a huge > ever-changing pool of ip addresses being load-balanced with a certain > weighting criteria. And possibly geographically as well. The biggest > problem with the pool at the moment is the load balancing. Being > geographically aware and returning servers that are close to the > client is not as crucial, but would be a nice feature.
I'm far from a DNS wizard. This might be crazy and it's probably heresy... I'm fishing for ways to spread the load without changing the normal BIND setup on the secondary servers. I'm assuming some wizard can write fancy code on the master. Normally BIND tries hard to keep all the secondaries in sync with the master. Could we cheat and deliberately get them out of sync? For example, suppose we have one master and 3 secondaries with a TTL of 1 hour. Set things up so that the first secondary reloads on the hour, the second one at 20 minutes after the hour, and the 3rd at 40 minutes after the hour. When they reload, give them each a different view of the pool. I think there are two ideas in there. One is to spread the peaks in time by staggering the reload times. The other is to give different views to each secondary. That could be done even if they all reload at the same time. -- The suespammers.org mail server is located in California. So are all my other mailboxes. Please do not send unsolicited bulk e-mail or unsolicited commercial e-mail to my suespammers.org address or any of my other addresses. These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam. _______________________________________________ timekeepers mailing list [email protected] https://fortytwo.ch/mailman/cgi-bin/listinfo/timekeepers
