[dns-wg] Moneytizing error pages using DNS

>On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 15:17 +0300, Kostas Zorbadelos wrote:
>> Now, this article also contains opinions on other matters I am not sure
>> I support. For example, it also criticizes badly the use of DNS for load
>> balancing on the grounds of "DNS was not designed to express
>> policy". And what happens when a single machine is not enough to
>> accomodate load? Do you employ NAT load balancers? Is this a better
>> idea? Having a single "name" for a "service" seems to me like a good
>> idea in general.
>> Anyway, long talk, I guess it needs a thread of its own.

On 06.10.11 11:04, Rasmus Larsen wrote:
>Agreed, in particular NAT load balancers either limit the use of IPSEC
>in transport mode (which will become viable with ipv6), or will break
>horribly when people start using it. From my point of view, DNS seems to
>be the best load balancing strategy out there.

I'd say that's still problem of those load balancers, or their 
configuration (or IPSEC configuration). 

DNS is still one of worst place to try load balancing and failover 
switching.
-- 
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar at fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
Micro$oft random number generator: 0, 0, 0, 4.33e+67, 0, 0, 0...