Re: BalancerMember and RFC1035 compliance - BalancerMember worker hostname (65-character.long.DNS.name.com) too long

[Jim Jagielski]

PS: Want to propose it for back port, or should I? ;)

> On Feb 7, 2018, at 10:16 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Feb 7, 2018, at 10:07 AM, Graham Leggett <minf...@sharp.fm> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> In theory, the “accept a truncated value” will work around the problem and 
>> be backport-able, is that true?
> 
> +1 (assuming the truncated value is unique)