One Domain; Multiple IPs.

[Marc C Storck]

being big doesn't make them right!!!

but you're right as well, they are violating the RFC but they do it for
performance reasons which directly cause less network congestions....

at the end it seems to be a good violation, if used the right way!

Marc

----- Original Message -----
From: Barry Margolin <barmar at genuity.net>
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.dns.bind
To: <comp-protocols-dns-bind at moderators.isc.org>
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 11:37 PM
Subject: Re: One Domain; Multiple IPs.


> In article <9ivl4j$89l at pub3.rc.vix.com>,
> Kevin Darcy  <kcd at daimlerchrysler.com> wrote:
> >
> >Joseph S D Yao wrote:
> >> You could have two name servers, giving out different IP addresses.
> >> That way, if one side goes down, only HALF the accesses would be to the
> >> dead IP address.
> >
> >According to some interpretations, this is a DNS protocol violation. One
> >could rationalize it as a very volatile data, but even in that case the
> >protocol purists would insist that the SOA serial number be incremented
> >every time the zone "changed", i.e. every time a different response was
> >given by either nameserver.
>
> If it's a violation, it's one that's being violated constantly by most of
> the biggest web site operators.  Software and devices like lbnamed and
> Distributed Director return different answers depending on a variety of
> conditions, such as the load on the server or the location of client.
>
> --
> Barry Margolin, barmar at genuity.net
> Genuity, Burlington, MA
> *** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to
newsgroups.
> Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the
group.
>