Hi there! At work, we make use something often referred to as "weighted records", a feature offered by many managed DNS vendors. We use it to implement e.g. a canary environment, where we test changes on a small portion of production traffic. I played around with knot-dns for a bit (quite impressed), and figured it might be nice to implement such a feature for it. Turns out, the code is so amazing that if you abuse the infrastructure of the geoip module, it only takes an hour (very impressed). If you are interested in trying it, read on further below, but just to state my intention: I was wondering if such a feature would be of interest at all? I realize the geoip module may not be the appropriate for such an implementation, consider this merely a demo of sorts. So here goes nothing: 1. apply attached patch 2. config file snippet: mod-geoip: - id: test config-file: /etc/knot/test.conf ttl: 600 mode: weighted zone: - domain: example.com. file: "/var/lib/knot/example.com.zone" module: mod-geoip/test 3. /etc/knot/test.conf: lb.example.com: - weight: 10 CNAME: www1.example.com. - weight: 5 CNAME: www2.example.com. Results in this: conrad@deltree ~/hack/knot-dns $ for i in $(seq 1 100); do dig @192.168.1.242 A lb.example.com +short; done | sort | uniq -c 68 www1.example.com. 32 www2.example.com. conrad@deltree ~/hack/knot-dns $ for i in $(seq 1 100); do dig @192.168.1.242 A lb.example.com +short; done | sort | uniq -c 72 www1.example.com. 28 www2.example.com. conrad@deltree ~/hack/knot-dns $ for i in $(seq 1 100); do dig @192.168.1.242 A lb.example.com +short; done | sort | uniq -c 66 www1.example.com. 34 www2.example.com. You get the idea. Anyways, any thoughts and feedback would be greatly appreciated. Thanks a lot, Conrad

Hi Daniel, thanks for the support. I am happy to try to create a real patch, including documentation and stuff. What would be the procedure for this? Stick to this mailing list? Or would your Gitlab instance be the place to handle such things? Thanks a lot, Conrad On 2/19/19 11:03 AM, Daniel Salzman wrote: > Hi Conrad, > > Thanks for the patch :-) If such a feature is useful for someone, we could extend > the geoip module. I think it would be better than creating another module with > similar functionality. > > Best, > Daniel > > On 2/18/19 6:18 PM, Conrad Hoffmann wrote: >> Hi there! >> >> At work, we make use something often referred to as "weighted records", >> a feature offered by many managed DNS vendors. We use it to implement >> e.g. a canary environment, where we test changes on a small portion of >> production traffic. >> >> I played around with knot-dns for a bit (quite impressed), and figured >> it might be nice to implement such a feature for it. Turns out, the code >> is so amazing that if you abuse the infrastructure of the geoip module, >> it only takes an hour (very impressed). >> >> If you are interested in trying it, read on further below, but just to >> state my intention: I was wondering if such a feature would be of >> interest at all? >> >> I realize the geoip module may not be the appropriate for such an >> implementation, consider this merely a demo of sorts. >> >> So here goes nothing: >> >> 1. apply attached patch >> 2. config file snippet: >> >> mod-geoip: >> - id: test >> config-file: /etc/knot/test.conf >> ttl: 600 >> mode: weighted >> >> zone: >> - domain: example.com. >> file: "/var/lib/knot/example.com.zone" >> module: mod-geoip/test >> >> 3. /etc/knot/test.conf: >> >> lb.example.com: >> - weight: 10 >> CNAME: www1.example.com. >> - weight: 5 >> CNAME: www2.example.com. >> >> Results in this: >> >> conrad@deltree ~/hack/knot-dns $ for i in $(seq 1 100); do dig >> @192.168.1.242 A lb.example.com +short; done | sort | uniq -c >> 68 www1.example.com. >> 32 www2.example.com. >> conrad@deltree ~/hack/knot-dns $ for i in $(seq 1 100); do dig >> @192.168.1.242 A lb.example.com +short; done | sort | uniq -c >> 72 www1.example.com. >> 28 www2.example.com. >> conrad@deltree ~/hack/knot-dns $ for i in $(seq 1 100); do dig >> @192.168.1.242 A lb.example.com +short; done | sort | uniq -c >> 66 www1.example.com. >> 34 www2.example.com. >> >> >> You get the idea. Anyways, any thoughts and feedback would be greatly >> appreciated. >> >> Thanks a lot, >> Conrad >> >> >

Hi Daniel, I spent some time trying to create a similar patch for the refactored geoip module, but it would become very awkward, obsoleting the reason why I implemented it in there in the first place. Would you accept a patch adding a new module as well? Thanks a lot, Conrad On 2/19/19 2:29 PM, Daniel Salzman wrote: > Hi Conrad, > > First, please wait until we finish some optimizations in the module (in the order of weeks) :-) > Then our Gitlab is the best place for further collaboration. Just your account has to be authorized. > > Daniel > > On 2/19/19 2:02 PM, Conrad Hoffmann wrote: >> Hi Daniel, >> >> thanks for the support. I am happy to try to create a real patch, >> including documentation and stuff. What would be the procedure for this? >> Stick to this mailing list? Or would your Gitlab instance be the place >> to handle such things? >> >> Thanks a lot, >> Conrad >> >> On 2/19/19 11:03 AM, Daniel Salzman wrote: >>> Hi Conrad, >>> >>> Thanks for the patch :-) If such a feature is useful for someone, we could extend >>> the geoip module. I think it would be better than creating another module with >>> similar functionality. >>> >>> Best, >>> Daniel >>> >>> On 2/18/19 6:18 PM, Conrad Hoffmann wrote: >>>> Hi there! >>>> >>>> At work, we make use something often referred to as "weighted records", >>>> a feature offered by many managed DNS vendors. We use it to implement >>>> e.g. a canary environment, where we test changes on a small portion of >>>> production traffic. >>>> >>>> I played around with knot-dns for a bit (quite impressed), and figured >>>> it might be nice to implement such a feature for it. Turns out, the code >>>> is so amazing that if you abuse the infrastructure of the geoip module, >>>> it only takes an hour (very impressed). >>>> >>>> If you are interested in trying it, read on further below, but just to >>>> state my intention: I was wondering if such a feature would be of >>>> interest at all? >>>> >>>> I realize the geoip module may not be the appropriate for such an >>>> implementation, consider this merely a demo of sorts. >>>> >>>> So here goes nothing: >>>> >>>> 1. apply attached patch >>>> 2. config file snippet: >>>> >>>> mod-geoip: >>>> - id: test >>>> config-file: /etc/knot/test.conf >>>> ttl: 600 >>>> mode: weighted >>>> >>>> zone: >>>> - domain: example.com. >>>> file: "/var/lib/knot/example.com.zone" >>>> module: mod-geoip/test >>>> >>>> 3. /etc/knot/test.conf: >>>> >>>> lb.example.com: >>>> - weight: 10 >>>> CNAME: www1.example.com. >>>> - weight: 5 >>>> CNAME: www2.example.com. >>>> >>>> Results in this: >>>> >>>> conrad@deltree ~/hack/knot-dns $ for i in $(seq 1 100); do dig >>>> @192.168.1.242 A lb.example.com +short; done | sort | uniq -c >>>> 68 www1.example.com. >>>> 32 www2.example.com. >>>> conrad@deltree ~/hack/knot-dns $ for i in $(seq 1 100); do dig >>>> @192.168.1.242 A lb.example.com +short; done | sort | uniq -c >>>> 72 www1.example.com. >>>> 28 www2.example.com. >>>> conrad@deltree ~/hack/knot-dns $ for i in $(seq 1 100); do dig >>>> @192.168.1.242 A lb.example.com +short; done | sort | uniq -c >>>> 66 www1.example.com. >>>> 34 www2.example.com. >>>> >>>> >>>> You get the idea. Anyways, any thoughts and feedback would be greatly >>>> appreciated. >>>> >>>> Thanks a lot, >>>> Conrad >>>> >>>> >>> >