One question about 'Stealth servers'
Kevin Darcy
kcd at chrysler.com
Thu Jul 24 16:58:35 UTC 2014
I know of no way to do this within BIND itself, but if you Anycast your
nameservers, and carefully tweak route preferences and whatnot, you
could ensure that some instances (call it set A) only get used if all of
the members of another set of instances (call it set B) stop advertising
the route(s).
Of course, that only works if the box is sufficiently down that it stops
advertising the route(s). Other failure modes (e.g. zone expired,
misconfigured, busying out, nameserver process dead) wouldn't
necessarily trigger failover at the routing level.
If you want finer control, you'd probably have to use a dedicated
load-balancer-type device.
- Kevin
On 7/23/2014 10:38 PM, 许腾 wrote:
> Dear all,
> As a beginner of BIND, I'm writing to ask one question about 'Stealth servers'. To avoid the access failures arising from the broken down of Authoritative Name servers, I'd like to run Stealth servers as back up. My question is how could I set the Stealth servers as non-priority so that these Stealth servers could not be accessed unless the Authoritative Name servers are broken down? The 'forward' configuration item could set the servers as priority, is there another configuration item could do the contrary thing? Looking forward to your reply!
>
> Best wishes,
> Teng
> _______________________________________________
> Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list
>
> bind-users mailing list
> bind-users at lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
>
>
>
More information about the bind-users
mailing list