News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:DNS for Service Discovery in HAProxy by dcow on Thursday September 28, 2017 @02:44PM (#15359731)
I've been exploring DNS PTR/SRV records for seamless service discovery regardless of whether you have access to an authoritative DNS server configured for a given local domain or not (so things simply devolve to whether or not use use multicast or unicast to resolve SRV records). Basically DNS-SD. The idea of using SRV records in general seems foreign even in the ops realm. It's awesome to see HAProxy beginning to familiarize people with the concept of SRV records.
Re:DNS for Service Discovery in HAProxy by jlgaddis on Thursday September 28, 2017 @06:21PM (#15361259)
> The idea of using SRV records in general seems foreign even in the ops realm.

I'm not suggesting you use it but (as for how it works in general) look into how Microsoft's Active Directory works. They've had the "service discovery" problem figured out for going on two decades, including preferences for "closer" servers, weighting, and so on.

I'm no MS fan by any means but AD is one MS product that really is awesome.

Re:DNS for Service Discovery in HAProxy by snuxoll on Thursday September 28, 2017 @09:17PM (#15362068)
And how does MS do it? SRV records, that’s right.
Re:DNS for Service Discovery in HAProxy by jlgaddis on Thursday September 28, 2017 @11:09PM (#15362472)
Yeah, exactly. That's why I suggested he look into how it works (since "the idea ... seems foreign" to him).

I didn't mean to suggest that they had some revolutionary new unique way of handling service discovery or even that they were the first. I think maybe you misinterpreted or misunderstood my intentions.

Re:DNS for Service Discovery in HAProxy by snuxoll on Friday September 29, 2017 @12:04AM (#15362638)
It’s all good, I got what you meant :)

LDAP and Kerberos of all implementation are probably the most common use case for SRV records, most people probably don’t even know it. Real shame, in many ways I wish A/AAAA records weren’t even a thing for the vast majority of services (HTTP, I’m looking at you!)

Re:DNS for Service Discovery in HAProxy by inopinatus on Friday September 29, 2017 @01:08AM (#15362844)
I would love to see HTTP adopt SRV as well. Sadly the browser vendors think they're important enough that they can squat the address record all for themselves.
Re:DNS for Service Discovery in HAProxy by tepmoc on Friday September 29, 2017 @06:49AM (#15364182)
Last argument I heard in chrome bugtracker it was - doing additional dns lookup slowdown user experience, which is why they abandoned idea adding it

https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=22423

Re:DNS for Service Discovery in HAProxy by inopinatus on Friday September 29, 2017 @08:59PM (#15370537)
That is what we call in Australia a "furphy". SRV records do not intrinsically require an additional lookup or round trip. Poor zone configurations may fare less well. But that is true of all poor DNS configuration. For sites that care about resolution speed, they already optimise as necessary, and they would for SRV as well.

Browsers do not own the A record and should never have been using it in the first place, so to continue squatting them and invent specious reasons for doing so is simple arrogance and assertion of unwarranted privilege.

Instead we have the multiple warts and misbehaviours of misusing the DNS for URL endpoint resolution.

Re:DNS for Service Discovery in HAProxy by empath75 on Thursday September 28, 2017 @08:59PM (#15362011)
Consul supports this out of the box.
Re:DNS for Service Discovery in HAProxy by bedis9 on Friday September 29, 2017 @02:18AM (#15363150)
And HAProxy supports Consul out of the box thanks to this new feature :)