📅 Original date posted:2014-05-19
📝 Original message:On Tue, 20 May 2014 01:44:29 +0100, Robert McKay wrote:
> On Mon, 19 May 2014 19:49:52 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Robert McKay <robert at mckay.com>
>> wrote:
>>> It should be possible to configure bind as a DNS forwarder.. this
>>> can
>>> be done in a zone context.. then you can forward the different
>>> zones
>>> to
>>> different dnsseed daemons running on different non-public IPs or
>>> two
>>> different ports on the same IP (or on one single non-public IP
>>> since
>>> there's really no reason to expose the dnsseed directly daemon at
>>> all).
>>
>> Quite the opposite. dnsseed data rotates through a lot of addresses
>> if available. Using the bind/zone-xfer system would result in fewer
>> total addresses going through to the clients, thanks to the addition
>> of caching levels that the bind/zone-xfer system brings.
>>
>> That said, if the choice is between no-service and bind, bind it is
>> ;p
>
> Setting it up as a zone forwarder causes each request to go through
> to
> the dnsseed backend for each request.
This stackoverflow describes a similar situation;
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/15338232/how-to-forward-a-subzone
you can additionally specify the port to forward too;
http://www.zytrax.com/books/dns/ch7/queries.html#forwarders
it should be possible to forward to different ports on 127.0.0.1 for
each dnsseed instance.
Rob
Robert McKay [ARCHIVE] /
npub1t6…he2py
2023-06-07 15:21:27
in reply to nevent1q…60wf
Author Public Key
npub1t6suh64e65qzzjtthffl6sa3cagp6k9usnx4qev4jsjzf7xud8psdhe2pySeen on
wss://relay.noswhere.comPublished at
2023-06-07 15:21:27Event JSON
{
"id": "c60f1f3f0bd7e16f6a8278fe89bc5f1b631e3ac55859e94b3a6386397b220963",
"pubkey": "5ea1cbeab9d50021496bba53fd43b1c7501d58bc84cd506595942424f8dc69c3",
"created_at": 1686151287,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"27f2cc162bf57c487222b138d4571ce221ca7cd25d269ba16d303b1b70b76927",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"09ca1aca9b3c2699f3d0071cda37330cbe638ef8f95aea035b36db883a647755",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"5ea1cbeab9d50021496bba53fd43b1c7501d58bc84cd506595942424f8dc69c3"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-05-19\n📝 Original message:On Tue, 20 May 2014 01:44:29 +0100, Robert McKay wrote:\n\u003e On Mon, 19 May 2014 19:49:52 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:\n\u003e\u003e On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Robert McKay \u003crobert at mckay.com\u003e\n\u003e\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\u003e It should be possible to configure bind as a DNS forwarder.. this\n\u003e\u003e\u003e can\n\u003e\u003e\u003e be done in a zone context.. then you can forward the different \n\u003e\u003e\u003e zones\n\u003e\u003e\u003e to\n\u003e\u003e\u003e different dnsseed daemons running on different non-public IPs or \n\u003e\u003e\u003e two\n\u003e\u003e\u003e different ports on the same IP (or on one single non-public IP \n\u003e\u003e\u003e since\n\u003e\u003e\u003e there's really no reason to expose the dnsseed directly daemon at\n\u003e\u003e\u003e all).\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Quite the opposite. dnsseed data rotates through a lot of addresses\n\u003e\u003e if available. Using the bind/zone-xfer system would result in fewer\n\u003e\u003e total addresses going through to the clients, thanks to the addition\n\u003e\u003e of caching levels that the bind/zone-xfer system brings.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e That said, if the choice is between no-service and bind, bind it is\n\u003e\u003e ;p\n\u003e\n\u003e Setting it up as a zone forwarder causes each request to go through \n\u003e to\n\u003e the dnsseed backend for each request.\n\nThis stackoverflow describes a similar situation;\n\nhttp://stackoverflow.com/questions/15338232/how-to-forward-a-subzone\n\nyou can additionally specify the port to forward too;\n\nhttp://www.zytrax.com/books/dns/ch7/queries.html#forwarders\n\nit should be possible to forward to different ports on 127.0.0.1 for \neach dnsseed instance.\n\nRob",
"sig": "69359318f477a12fc04366bad833d031924b5e55676f2c9888fab0655149c513749886d95812038fa7953af6f4490273a10c4f4a22033b52ddbf5ee52383e035"
}