Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

SRV records for locating remctl services #11

Open
jonrober opened this issue Sep 22, 2015 · 3 comments
Open

SRV records for locating remctl services #11

jonrober opened this issue Sep 22, 2015 · 3 comments

Comments

@jonrober
Copy link
Contributor

Support a scheme for locating remctl services via SRV records. Rob Riepel proposes:

_ipm._remctl.Stanford.EDU. SRV 0 0 4373 yang.Stanford.EDU.
_ipm._remctl.Stanford.EDU. SRV 5 0 4373 yin.Stanford.EDU.

plus a way to specify the sub-service for remctl's use.

We would want to add _tcp to those to follow the SRV record specification.

@riepel
Copy link

riepel commented Nov 12, 2021

Rob was confused. The scheme should be:

_remctl._tcp.ipm.stanford.edu. 1800 SRV 0 0 4373 yin.stanford.edu.
_remctl._tcp.ipm.stanford.edu. 1800 SRV 5 0 4373 yang.stanford.edu.

@macrotex
Copy link

How would this work? Let's say two different departments have remctl services exposed to respond to "remctl myserver puppet oneshot", which department's server would the remctl client be directed to?

@riepel
Copy link

riepel commented Nov 16, 2021

How would this work? Let's say two different departments have remctl services exposed to respond to "remctl myserver puppet oneshot", which department's server would the remctl client be directed to?

Depends on the DNS setup. If there is a DNS SRV record _remctl._tcp.myserver.$domain, the connection would be made to the server chosen by the algorithm defined in the "Usage rules" section of RFC 2782; if not, the connection would be made to myserver.$domain (as defined in the same section).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants