[313] in Hesiod
Re: Info please
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Theodore Ts'o)
Mon Jul 22 13:25:58 1996
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 13:23:52 -0400
From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU>
To: amit@jpmorgan.com
Cc: asafier@csc.com, hesiod@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: <31F037E4.577D@jpmorgan.com> (message from Amit Bhatiani on Fri, 19 Jul 1996 21:35:32 -0400)
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 21:35:32 -0400
From: Amit Bhatiani <bhatiani_amit@jpmorgan.com>
umm..not really. The issue here is not the router, but the primary
server. Having the router be multi-homed and having multiple points of
connection to the internet still does not solve the problem of having a
fault-tolerant application server that transparently (to the
application's clients) switches over to the secondary application
server. This has nothing to do with the router or the internet
connection.
Why do you insist on having the DNS only talk to one server, and only
fail over to the backup when the primary fails? Run BIND on your local
client, and it will automatically keep track of which one of the your
DNS server is responding the most quickly, and use the fastest server
automatically. (It will periodically try using the other servers every
once in a while just to make sure that it is still using the fastest
server.)
So, you can have DNS servers for your domain located in Hong Kong, New
York, and London, and for machines in the Hong Kong office, the Hong
Kong server will automatically be the primary, and for machines in the
London office, the London server will automatically be the primary, and
so on.
The bottom line is that the DNS isn't broken --- only certain ways that
people (perhaps foolishly?) try to use the DNS are broken.
In any case, this isn't a hesiod issue, so we should perhaps move it to
a more appropriate forum --- such as the bind-users list.
- Ted
