|
I wouldn't call it load balancing .. more like client intelligence i.e.
if one server is broke use another.
You could say the same about SMTP...
You don't normaly need to load balance because you can tell your
customers to use a different ip address for their DNS requests (i.e.
multiple secondary servers to a primary)
Regards,
Malcolm Turnbull.
Loadbalancer.org Limited
+44 (0)7715 770523
http://www.loadbalancer.org/
" When a single point of failure is not an option"
Why not try our online demonstration
<http://www.loadbalancer.org/online_Demo.htm> ? Or get answers to common
questions <http://www.loadbalancer.org/fud.htm> ?
Jeff Kilbride wrote:
DNS has built-in load balancing? Do you have a URL or any more info on the
Alan Cox stuff? Does anybody else agree that load balancing DNS servers
with LVS is not worthwhile?
Thanks,
--jeff
My only problem now is with the DNS services I am trying to
load balance. For some reason, it's not working while http
and smtp are fine. I can run DNS queries from the director
across the local network to each realserver and get a good
response, but when I try to access DNS on the VIP (using "dig
@VIP somedomain.com") I get a server timeout. The only
difference I see is that DNS uses UDP, but I have both TCP
and UDP domain services setup in ipvsadm:
DNS had built-in load-balancing techniques. From what I have read about
it
(Alan Cox) you are better off using the built-in methods than LVS.
If you still want to persist with LVS-DNS I would recommend getting your
network sniffing tools (tcpdump, ethereal) to identify & solve the
problem.
Regards,
P
|
