Hi Lukas,
Thanks for your help!
> On Mar 10, 2025, at 21:49, Lukas Tribus wrote:
>
> It's a blocking syscall, I don't think there is anything that can be
> done about it.
>
> Your use case matches "init-addr none" (or last,none): only the
> haproxy resolver will be used, haproxy will not refus
Hi Luke,
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 12:54:51PM +0700, Luke Seelenbinder wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for confirming it should work--based on the feedback, we realized the
> issue is actually not with `nameservers`, but on startup, so this is actually
> init-addr taking precedence. We missed that in t
Hi Willy,
> On Mar 10, 2025, at 15:12, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>
> Hi Luke,
>
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 12:54:51PM +0700, Luke Seelenbinder wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Thanks for confirming it should work--based on the feedback, we realized the
>> issue is actually not with `nameservers`, but on star
On 3/10/25 15:39, Lukas Tribus wrote:
>> In this case for me it does not actually abort and haproxy goes into a
>> busy loop over this bind().
>
> To reproduce this busy loop with a 5 line config:
>
> lukas@dev:~/haproxy$ cat ../cert/dns-source-bind-short.cfg
> resolvers default
> nameserver n
4 matches
Mail list logo
