i disagree. dns-based load balancing is an unfortunate overloading and should never be done. RFC 3484 is correct as it is.
re: > It seems that Vista implements RFC 3484 address selection, including the > requirement to sort IP addresses. This breaks a great deal of operational > dependence on DNS-based load balancing, as well as being based on an > incorrect understanding of how IP addresses are allocated. > > RFC 3484 needs to be updated to delete this rule, so that the order > returned from the DNS is honoured when the client has no better knowledge > about which address is appropriate. > > See > http://drplokta.livejournal.com/109267.html > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg51874.html > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/discuss/current/msg01035.html > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsop/current/msg05847.html > http://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2007/11/msg00029.html > > Tony. > -- > f.anthony.n.finch <d...@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/ > GERMAN BIGHT HUMBER: SOUTHWEST 5 TO 7. MODERATE OR ROUGH. SQUALLY SHOWERS. > MODERATE OR GOOD. > > -- > to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-requ...@ops.ietf.org with > the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. > archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/> _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
