From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 19 08:39:57 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A32816A412 for ; Tue, 19 Sep 2006 08:39:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ob@gruft.de) Received: from obh.snafu.de (obh.snafu.de [213.73.92.34]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 076F644397 for ; Tue, 19 Sep 2006 08:39:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ob@gruft.de) Received: from ob by obh.snafu.de with local (Exim 4.63 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1GPb91-0009pT-6N for freebsd-stable@freebsd.org; Tue, 19 Sep 2006 10:39:55 +0200 Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 10:39:55 +0200 From: Oliver Brandmueller To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20060919083955.GB87657@e-Gitt.NET> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org References: <450F8777.7080407@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <450F8777.7080407@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: Oliver Brandmueller Subject: Re: bind round robin X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 08:39:57 -0000 --pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi. On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 02:00:23PM +0800, pinoyskull wrote: > One of my client's domain has multiple IPs for redundancy, i configured= =20 > his www as such >=20 > www IN A 10.10.10.10 > www IN A 192.168.0.10 >=20 > Is there a way to prioritize 10.10.10.10 over 192.168.0.10? How do i=20 > configure it? DNS round robin is not about redundancy, the only thing you could have that way is a kind of load balancing (not the most sophisticated way, though). Whenever one of the servers fails, around half of the requests still goes there and then times out/gets conn refused or whatever the problem is. Prioritizing is not easily possible. Probably it helps if you add one of the IPs more often to the set, but I never tried that and did not read the docs on this topic, so before breaking your zone first read the specs, if this works! For serious redundancy with failover and/or load balancing with a good=20 leveling you should consider getting a load balancer (be it hardware or=20 software), better two so you don't have the single point of failure=20 there :-) - Oliver --=20 | Oliver Brandmueller | Offenbacher Str. 1 | Germany D-14197 Berlin | | Fon +49-172-3130856 | Fax +49-172-3145027 | WWW: http://the.addict.de/ | | Ich bin das Internet. Sowahr ich Gott helfe. | | Eine gewerbliche Nutzung aller enthaltenen Adressen ist nicht gestattet! | --pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFFD6zbiqtMdzjafykRAsOBAKC3S/+RNCx/oVbq57wCfCIc2K0Z9gCgnC22 3RMov/THh7Irhid3fkWUCvQ= =Rs4I -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt--