Prioritising replys

[David R. Kirk]

Lacking a legitimate load-balancing device, using a rotor as you have
illustrated below is a bad way to load balance.  But you know that. 

Do you have another IP address at your disposal?  If you create 
another virtual interface on the machine that is serving 192.168.0.1,
e.g. 192.168.0.3, then you could set up your rotor as follows ...

post.domain.com     IN     A     192.168.0.1
                               IN     A     192.168.0.2
                               IN     A     192.168.0.3

... which would result in the two interfaces on the .1 machine getting a
little more traffic.  

Your best bet, of course, is to get an actual load balancer in place,
but this is a possible option you might pursue.

Best regards,

dave




----- Original Message ----- 
From: Russell Foster <rf at rf0.com>
To: <bind-users at isc.org>
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 10:12 AM
Subject: Prioritising replys


> 
> Hi All, 
> Can any of you tell me if the following is possible. I have a
> requirement to load balance 2 outgoing mail servers. At the moment I have
> 
> post.domain.com IN A 192.168.0.1
> IN A 192.168.0.2
> 
> and this work fine with both getting equal mail. However what would be
> nice is if I could get 192.168.0.1 to handle more of the requests due to
> it being a bigger box. I know that I can't actually say one has a higher
> priority in the zone file (like MX records) but is their a way of getting
> bind to favour one over the other so that for say every 2/3 request it
> answers .1 I am aware that should .1 die then there will be issues but I
> can get round that myself...
> 
> TIA
> 
> Rus
> 
> Russell Foster 
> EMEA IT Unix Systems Administrator
> Art Technology Group (www.atg.com)
> 
> "Stoke me a clipper, I'll be back for Christmas"
> - Ace Rimmer Red Dwarf Season VII Episode II