Server names for query

[Matus UHLAR - fantomas]

> Casey Deccio wrote:
> >RFC 1035 [1] (page 44) describes the use of a list of server names 
> >(SLIST) to query for a particular name.  It is unclear to me from the 
> >RFC as to whether the server is selected by address or by name.  In 
> >other words, all history (e.g., batting average and response time) 
> >being equal, if a name resolves to two IP addresses, is it twice as 
> >likely to be used in resolution for a name as that which resolves to 
> >only one--both according to the RFC, and as implemented in BIND?  Example:
> >
> >example.com <http://example.com>. 3600 IN NS ns1.example.com 
> ><http://ns1.example.com>.
> >example.com <http://example.com>. 3600 IN NS ns2.example.com 
> ><http://ns2.example.com>.
> >ns1.example.com <http://ns1.example.com>. 3600 IN A 10.0.0.1
> >ns1.example.com <http://ns1.example.com>. 3600 IN A 10.0.0.2
> >ns2.example.com <http://ns2.example.com>. 3600 IN A 10.0.0.3

On 23.03.09 17:20, Kevin Darcy wrote:
> For the *initial* NS query, I believe BIND will resolve those names down 
> to a flat set of addresses, all of which have equal chance of being 
> tried, so, yes, if a given NS name resolves to more addresses than other 
> names, it is more likely to be tried on the initial NS query.

Btw how does BIND send notifies? does it send them to _any_ of those IP
addresses? Some RFCs in the past iirc assumed that one name with multiple
IPs is one multihomed host, which could lead to assumption that it's enough
to query one of those IP's.

I believe it's not true.
-- 
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar at fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
Posli tento mail 100 svojim znamim - nech vidia aky si idiot
Send this email to 100 your friends - let them see what an idiot you are