Search the web
Sign In
New User? Sign Up
dnrd · DNRD discussion list
? Already a member? Sign in to Yahoo!

Yahoo! Groups Tips

Did you know...
Show off your group to the world. Share a photo of your group with us.

Best of Y! Groups

   Check them out and nominate your group.
Having problems with message search? Fill out this form to ensure your group is one of the first to be migrated to the new message search system.

Messages

  Messages Help
Advanced
indexing redundant servers by domain ...   Message List  
Reply | Forward Message #165 of 261 |
Hi all,

As I was playing around with dnrd last night, I was bothered by the
restrictions on the -s<ip>:domain> and -s<ip> combinations. in looking
through the code, it seems like what we need is to keep dns_srv[] info
*by domain* (including default). You'd also have to keep serv_count
and serv_act by domain, but they seem fairly localized. This would
allow for setups like:

dnrd -s 1.2.3.4:domain1 -s 1.2.3.5:domain1 -s 2.3.4.5 -s 2.3.4.6

which would basically put in 1 pair of servers for domain1, and 1 pair
for the default.

This seems like a not-too-terrible modification -- will there be
heartburn if I go ahead and do it? I am not thinking of changing
dns_srv[], just adding some additional info and accessor functions et
the correct current and next active server based on the domain.

Thanks,

Chris




Thu Nov 9, 2000 6:18 am

chris@...
Send Email Send Email

Forward
Message #165 of 261 |
Expand Messages Author Sort by Date

Hi all, As I was playing around with dnrd last night, I was bothered by the restrictions on the -s<ip>:domain> and -s<ip> combinations. in looking through the...
chris@...
Send Email
Nov 9, 2000
6:18 am

... I would be very interested in seeing this done. I had even started on the changes myself, using an array of linked lists (one list per domain). I got a lot...
Jeff Hildebrand
hildebrj@...
Send Email
Nov 29, 2000
10:27 pm
Advanced

Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Guidelines - Help