Thanks Kevin for the answer,
But rrset-order, can only disble the round robin (cyclic=round robin | random= 
random | fixed=disable round robin)
And sorlist prioritise basing on IP of the client, i don't see anyway how to 
send( for example) 75% of http traffic to bigserver1.mysite.com and 25% of 
traffic to smallserver1.mysite.com
And for the SRV which make exacly what i want, it's not supported by browser.
May be with bind10 we will have this feature for A record like what we have now 
for MX!

Thanks.
Issam HARRATHI




Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2011 12:40:22 -0400
From: Kevin Darcy <k...@chrysler.com>
Subject: Re: priority with A record?
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Message-ID: <4d9b45f6.9090...@chrysler.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"

On 4/5/2011 8:23 AM, iharrathi....@orange-ftgroup.com wrote:
> Hi,
> can i make priority on a A or NS record? Since with round robin if i 
> put  the same record record 2 or 3 time, Bind ignore the duplicates 
> Records, means
>  this:
>
> wikipediaNSns2.wikimedia.org.
>
> wikipediaNSns0.wikimedia.org.
>
> is the same like this:
>
> wikipediaNSns2.wikimedia.org.
>
> wikipediaNSns0.wikimedia.org.
>
> wikipediaNSns0.wikimedia.org.
>
> In this 2 case it will send 50% of traffic to ns2 and 50% to ns0;
>
> Is there anyway to enable priority on A or NS record?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
For NS records, there is no way to do this in BIND, and it's completely 
unnecessary anyway, since every major DNS full-resolver implementation will 
keep track of how fast nameservers respond -- based on round-trip times, known 
as "RTT"s -- and prefer faster-responding nameservers over slower-responding 
ones. So the load spreads itself automatically, and failures -- which are 
assessed as really "bad" performance -- are routed around.

For A/AAAA records, there are mechanisms to control the order in which the 
records are presented. See "sortlist" and "rrset-order" (not sure that 
"rrset-order" even exists in later versions of BIND, since I've never used it 
in production). However, these are only practical on tightly-controlled 
intranets, where all of the BIND-instance configurations can be kept in sync 
with each other, otherwise one BIND instance may undo the careful 
address-record ordering that another performs. rrset-order and sortlist are 
pretty much useless for Internet names, since the vast majority Internet users 
get their DNS through intermediate resolvers, which will usually randomize or 
round-robin the responses whenever they are answering from their caches.

As another poster pointed out, SRV records provide the capability for the 
domain owner to implement per-name failover and "weighting" of targets, in the 
DNS data itself. But, thusfar the DNS community hasn't had much success getting 
client-software developers (e.g. browser
developers) to adopt SRV record support. Meanwhile, certain network-hardware 
companies (including among others a certain huge router
vendor) rake in big money with their sledgehammer "load-balancer device" 
approach to the problem. There are software approaches to network 
load-balancing as well, but I have no direct experience with those.

                                                                         
                                                                         
                                                                         
                 - Kevin

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/attachments/20110405/abe4dd37/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------


********************************************************************************
IMPORTANT.Les informations contenues dans ce message electronique y compris les 
fichiers attaches sont strictement confidentielles
et peuvent etre protegees par la loi.
Ce message electronique est destine exclusivement au(x) destinataire(s) 
mentionne(s) ci-dessus.
Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur ou s il ne vous est pas destine, 
veuillez immediatement le signaler  a l expediteur et effacer ce message 
et tous les fichiers eventuellement attaches.
Toute lecture, exploitation ou transmission des informations contenues dans ce 
message est interdite.
Tout message electronique est susceptible d alteration.
A ce titre, le Groupe France Telecom decline toute responsabilite notamment s 
il a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie.
De meme, il appartient au destinataire de s assurer de l absence de tout virus.

IMPORTANT.This e-mail message and any attachments are strictly confidential and 
may be protected by law. This message is
intended only for the named recipient(s) above.
If you have received this message in error, or are not the named recipient(s), 
please immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail message.
Any unauthorized view, usage or disclosure ofthis message is prohibited.
Since e-mail messages may not be reliable, France Telecom Group shall not be 
liable for any message if modified, changed or falsified.
Additionally the recipient should ensure they are actually virus free.
********************************************************************************

_______________________________________________
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

Reply via email to