Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WmYGT-0007Ay-SI for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 20 May 2014 00:50:45 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of mckay.com designates 37.1.88.131 as permitted sender) client-ip=37.1.88.131; envelope-from=robert@mckay.com; helo=mail.mckay.com; Received: from mail.mckay.com ([37.1.88.131]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) id 1WmYGS-0008Cp-Fm for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 20 May 2014 00:50:45 +0000 Received: from www-data by mail.mckay.com with local (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WmYGE-0004r2-82; Tue, 20 May 2014 01:50:30 +0100 To: Robert McKay X-PHP-Originating-Script: 0:func.inc MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 01:50:30 +0100 From: Robert McKay In-Reply-To: <0f40d061612966ff809fff04d3f698eb@webmail.mckay.com> References: <09E70F88-DA1C-4E3F-9342-547FB8794EAB@heliacal.net> <779f3ed92d29cfd6922a92c5d60d3f9d@webmail.mckay.com> <0f40d061612966ff809fff04d3f698eb@webmail.mckay.com> Message-ID: X-Sender: robert@mckay.com User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.5.3 X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.7 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1WmYGS-0008Cp-Fm Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] DNS seeds unstable X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 00:50:46 -0000 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 >> 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