North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Load balancing/Multiple CNAME's (Was: Re: Beyond DNS...)
On Fri, 5 Jun 1998, Studded wrote: ) Daniel Reed wrote: ) > but I can't CNAME n.ml.org to ) > narnia.n.ml.org, nor can I CNAME n.ml.org to ftp.microsoft.com, or any ) > other host), ) Why not? ) n.ml.org. IN CNAME ftp.microsoft.com. ) would be perfectly valid. Of course uncle bill might not like it much. First of all, I would have a CNAME along with extra information (at the very bare minimum, my SOA and NS list). I just modified my zone map for random.ml.org. and removed the IN A and IN MX records, then CNAME'd it to n.ml.org.: [SOA record snipped] IN NS ns.n.ml.org. IN NS urtho.shorecrest.org. ; IN A 220.127.116.11 ; IN MX 0 mail.n.ml.org. ; IN MX 5 mx5.mhv.net. ; IN MX 10 mx10.mhv.net. IN CNAME n.ml.org. Jun 5 19:57:37 narnia named: random.ml.org has CNAME and other data (invalid) Jun 5 19:57:37 narnia last message repeated 2 times So, I guess the simplest answer to your question is because BIND spanked me when I tried to do that. ) > you cannot use multiple CNAMEs. You can *physically* CNAME ) > multiple times, ) I'm not sure I understand the distinction you're trying to make here. I was just trying to avoid someone saying "hey, pico let me add in the second CNAME!!!!!" or something equally lame. You can physically have multiple CNAMEs, but you're not allowed to. ) > What you're in fact doing is aliasing one host to two different ) > ones, which doesn't make sense (because a CNAME says that ThisHost is ) > actually just a pointer to ThatHost). ) Under usual situations, no it wouldn't make sense. However in the load ) balancing situation it's the only way to go for more complex setups. ) ) > Do an nslookup on irc.dal.net a couple times, or us.undernet.org. Each ) > time you do it, the IP's are shifted over to the left by one. ) Well I'll take that as a compliment, since I am DALnet's hostmaster. :) ) However I regret to inform you that I did use the CNAME hack to fine ) tune our load balancing. Ah, so that explains why nslookup barfs when I try to lookup irc.dal.net repeatedly. I thought it was just because of some peculiarity in your setup (well, I guess it was!). ) I'd also like to point out that the IP's in a ) true round-robin setup (as manifest with BIND, et al) will be returned ) randomly, not in a rotate once cycle. Well, if that is true, then it's because of your setup. BIND will rotate IPs once per query, and that's documented behaviour. I guess I should have just used us.undernet.org. as the example of a proper IN A round robin, which is done using multiple IN A's, and also exhibits the shift-each- host-to-the-left behaviour. For an easier to see example, nslookup nanog.random.ml.org a couple times. Name: nanog.random.ml.org Addresses: 18.104.22.168, 22.214.171.124, 126.96.36.199, 188.8.131.52 184.108.40.206 Name: nanog.random.ml.org Addresses: 220.127.116.11, 18.104.22.168, 22.214.171.124, 126.96.36.199 188.8.131.52 Name: nanog.random.ml.org Addresses: 184.108.40.206, 220.127.116.11, 18.104.22.168, 22.214.171.124 126.96.36.199 Name: nanog.random.ml.org Addresses: 188.8.131.52, 184.108.40.206, 220.127.116.11, 18.104.22.168 22.214.171.124 ... ) Finally, if you plan to disagree with anything in this post, please ) quote chapter and verse from the relevant RFC. I've spent a lot of time ) studying this topic and am quite sure of my facts. I'd rather come up with evidence as opposed to rhetoric, but if you insist... Well, I downloaded bind-8.1.2-doc.tar.gz, but I don't really have the time currently to look through it to find out specific examples in the documentation. -- Daniel Reed <email@example.com> (ask me for my PGP key) Drugs have taught an entire generation of American kids the metric system.