On 01/03/2024 11:02, Jim Reid wrote:
On 1 Mar 2024, at 10:37, Greg Choules via bind-users
wrote:
In summary, Do the hard work of traffic steering somewhere else and let your
DNS resolvers deliver the chosen answer. Don't make the resolvers themselves
try to do this on the basis of incompl
> On 1 Mar 2024, at 10:37, Greg Choules via bind-users
> wrote:
>
> In summary, Do the hard work of traffic steering somewhere else and let your
> DNS resolvers deliver the chosen answer. Don't make the resolvers themselves
> try to do this on the basis of incomplete information.
Well said
2nd $beverage consumed.
I have never liked sortlist since I inherited it 16 years ago in my
previous job.
For me it suffers from at least one fundamental problem:
- If a client, say at location "1", is given a bunch of sorted A records
with the server at location "1" first, what does the client do
Hi there,
On Fri, 1 Mar 2024, Matus UHLAR wrote:
On 01.03.24 08:24, Ond?ej Sur? wrote:
> The "sortlist" option allows to define a complicated rules when and
> how to reorder the resource records in the responses. The same
> caveats as with the "rrset-order" apply - relying on any specific
> orde
On 01.03.24 08:24, Ondřej Surý wrote:
The "sortlist" option allows to define a complicated rules when and
how to reorder the resource records in the responses. The same
caveats as with the "rrset-order" apply - relying on any specific
order of resource records in the DNS responses is wrong.
We a
Hello,
In line with ISC's deprecation policy, I am notifying the mailing list
of our intent to deprecate the "sortlist" options and a value "fixed"
for "rrset-order" option.
These options allow to specify a on order of the resource records
in the responses.
The "fixed" value for "rrset-order" op
6 matches
Mail list logo
