How to get random subset of large rrset (30+ IPs for round robin)?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
11 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

How to get random subset of large rrset (30+ IPs for round robin)?

David Klatt
Hi,

I can't find a way to do the following although I invested plenty of time
in research - maybe you guys have an idea:

With bind, I'd need to serve a single A record with  30+  IP addresses  and
these addresses have to be returned in random order round robin,
which is done with:

    rrset-order {  order random;  };

and records like:

    foo  IN A  10.0.0.1
    foo  IN A  10.0.0.2
    foo  IN A  10.......N

Now I'd like bind to just return a  random subset  of e.g. 5 IP addresses
if someone requests this A record.

Reason for this are in my case some (thousands) older clients (that I can't control)
that seem not being able to handle that many IPs - the OS resolver just returns an error.

For my use case I absolutely need to make sure that each IP of that large
A record set is given out equally (statistically) and that at any time when
bind answers that one A record it only returns a random subset of all these IPs.

Has someone an idea on how to achieve the latter?

Thanks a lot in advance!

David
Geschäftsführer: Christoph Ostermann (CEO), Oliver Koch, Steffen Schneider, Hermann Schweizer, Tim Ulbricht.
Amtsgericht Kempten/Allgäu, Registernummer: 10655, Steuernummer 127/137/50792, USt.-IdNr. DE272208908
_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list

bind-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: How to get random subset of large rrset (30+ IPs for round robin)?

Kevin Darcy
[ Classification Level: GENERAL BUSINESS ]

Only thing that comes to mind is a constantly-running dynamic update script that adds/deletes records to/from the RRset at random.

A more sophisticated version of the script would look at what answers that have been given out in the recent past, and if some addresses were given out more than others (because of the randomness), "tilt" the answer set back more towards equal representation.

                                                                                                            - Kevin

On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 3:15 AM David Klatt <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

I can't find a way to do the following although I invested plenty of time
in research - maybe you guys have an idea:

With bind, I'd need to serve a single A record with  30+  IP addresses  and
these addresses have to be returned in random order round robin,
which is done with:

    rrset-order {  order random;  };

and records like:

    foo  IN A  10.0.0.1
    foo  IN A  10.0.0.2
    foo  IN A  10.......N

Now I'd like bind to just return a  random subset  of e.g. 5 IP addresses
if someone requests this A record.

Reason for this are in my case some (thousands) older clients (that I can't control)
that seem not being able to handle that many IPs - the OS resolver just returns an error.

For my use case I absolutely need to make sure that each IP of that large
A record set is given out equally (statistically) and that at any time when
bind answers that one A record it only returns a random subset of all these IPs.

Has someone an idea on how to achieve the latter?

Thanks a lot in advance!

David
Geschäftsführer: Christoph Ostermann (CEO), Oliver Koch, Steffen Schneider, Hermann Schweizer, Tim Ulbricht.
Amtsgericht Kempten/Allgäu, Registernummer: 10655, Steuernummer 127/137/50792, USt.-IdNr. DE272208908
_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list

bind-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list

bind-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: How to get random subset of large rrset (30+ IPs for round robin)?

Warren Kumari
In reply to this post by David Klatt
On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 3:14 AM David Klatt <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> I can't find a way to do the following although I invested plenty of time
> in research - maybe you guys have an idea:
>
> With bind, I'd need to serve a single A record with  30+  IP addresses  and
> these addresses have to be returned in random order round robin,
> which is done with:
>
>     rrset-order {  order random;  };
>
> and records like:
>
>     foo  IN A  10.0.0.1
>     foo  IN A  10.0.0.2
>     foo  IN A  10.......N
>
> Now I'd like bind to just return a  random subset  of e.g. 5 IP addresses
> if someone requests this A record.

I realize that this is the BIND list, but this sounds like an almost
perfect example of PowerDNS's LUA record type (or something with
CoreDNS)
Other than that, the only thing I can think of is BIND with DLZ and a
database that returns a random subset from a DB query, but that sounds
awful...

W

>
> Reason for this are in my case some (thousands) older clients (that I can't control)
> that seem not being able to handle that many IPs - the OS resolver just returns an error.
>
> For my use case I absolutely need to make sure that each IP of that large
> A record set is given out equally (statistically) and that at any time when
> bind answers that one A record it only returns a random subset of all these IPs.
>
> Has someone an idea on how to achieve the latter?
>
> Thanks a lot in advance!
>
> David
> Geschäftsführer: Christoph Ostermann (CEO), Oliver Koch, Steffen Schneider, Hermann Schweizer, Tim Ulbricht.
> Amtsgericht Kempten/Allgäu, Registernummer: 10655, Steuernummer 127/137/50792, USt.-IdNr. DE272208908
> _______________________________________________
> Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list
>
> bind-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users



--
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf
_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list

bind-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: How to get random subset of large rrset (30+ IPs for round robin)?

Matus UHLAR - fantomas
>On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 3:14 AM David Klatt <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> I can't find a way to do the following although I invested plenty of time
>> in research - maybe you guys have an idea:
>>
>> With bind, I'd need to serve a single A record with  30+  IP addresses  and
>> these addresses have to be returned in random order round robin,
>> which is done with:

>> Now I'd like bind to just return a  random subset  of e.g. 5 IP addresses
>> if someone requests this A record.

On 20.03.20 10:37, Warren Kumari wrote:
>I realize that this is the BIND list, but this sounds like an almost
>perfect example of PowerDNS's LUA record type (or something with
>CoreDNS)
>Other than that, the only thing I can think of is BIND with DLZ and a
>database that returns a random subset from a DB query, but that sounds
>awful...

I don't think BIND can do this at all. And I don't think it should...

>> Reason for this are in my case some (thousands) older clients (that I can't control)
>> that seem not being able to handle that many IPs - the OS resolver just returns an error.

why no use IPVS-like load balancer and hide all hosts behind one or two IPs?
that would help you much more, amongst others when any of those machines
fails.


--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, [hidden email] ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
WinError #98652: Operation completed successfully.
_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list

bind-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: How to get random subset of large rrset (30+ IPs for round robin)?

Warren Kumari
On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 1:04 PM Matus UHLAR - fantomas
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> >On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 3:14 AM David Klatt <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> I can't find a way to do the following although I invested plenty of time
> >> in research - maybe you guys have an idea:
> >>
> >> With bind, I'd need to serve a single A record with  30+  IP addresses  and
> >> these addresses have to be returned in random order round robin,
> >> which is done with:
>
> >> Now I'd like bind to just return a  random subset  of e.g. 5 IP addresses
> >> if someone requests this A record.
>
> On 20.03.20 10:37, Warren Kumari wrote:
> >I realize that this is the BIND list, but this sounds like an almost
> >perfect example of PowerDNS's LUA record type (or something with
> >CoreDNS)
> >Other than that, the only thing I can think of is BIND with DLZ and a
> >database that returns a random subset from a DB query, but that sounds
> >awful...
>
> I don't think BIND can do this at all. And I don't think it should...
>
> >> Reason for this are in my case some (thousands) older clients (that I can't control)
> >> that seem not being able to handle that many IPs - the OS resolver just returns an error.
>
> why no use IPVS-like load balancer and hide all hosts behind one or two IPs?
> that would help you much more, amongst others when any of those machines
> fails.

That's almost definitely the right answer, but there *are* cases where
something like what the OP was asking for -  0.pool.ntp.org springs to
mind as one example.
But, yes, a load balancer / anycast is almost definitely going to be a
better choice...

Warren.


>
>
> --
> Matus UHLAR - fantomas, [hidden email] ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
> Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
> Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
> WinError #98652: Operation completed successfully.
> _______________________________________________
> Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list
>
> bind-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users



--
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf
_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list

bind-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: How to get random subset of large rrset (30+ IPs for round robin)?

Bob Harold

On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 1:16 PM Warren Kumari <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 1:04 PM Matus UHLAR - fantomas
<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> >On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 3:14 AM David Klatt <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> I can't find a way to do the following although I invested plenty of time
> >> in research - maybe you guys have an idea:
> >>
> >> With bind, I'd need to serve a single A record with  30+  IP addresses  and
> >> these addresses have to be returned in random order round robin,
> >> which is done with:
>
> >> Now I'd like bind to just return a  random subset  of e.g. 5 IP addresses
> >> if someone requests this A record.
>
> On 20.03.20 10:37, Warren Kumari wrote:
> >I realize that this is the BIND list, but this sounds like an almost
> >perfect example of PowerDNS's LUA record type (or something with
> >CoreDNS)
> >Other than that, the only thing I can think of is BIND with DLZ and a
> >database that returns a random subset from a DB query, but that sounds
> >awful...
>
> I don't think BIND can do this at all. And I don't think it should...
>
> >> Reason for this are in my case some (thousands) older clients (that I can't control)
> >> that seem not being able to handle that many IPs - the OS resolver just returns an error.
>
> why no use IPVS-like load balancer and hide all hosts behind one or two IPs?
> that would help you much more, amongst others when any of those machines
> fails.

That's almost definitely the right answer, but there *are* cases where
something like what the OP was asking for -  0.pool.ntp.org springs to
mind as one example.
But, yes, a load balancer / anycast is almost definitely going to be a
better choice...

Warren.


>
>
> --
> Matus UHLAR - fantomas, [hidden email] ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
> Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
> Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
> WinError #98652: Operation completed successfully.
> _______________________________________________
> Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list
>
> bind-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users



--
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf


Do you know why the OS is having a problem?  It just occurs to me that the problem might be that the result does not fit in a UDP packet, (without EDNS?) and the fallback to TCP is not working.  Can you try 'dig ...' and 'dig +tcp ...' on that OS to see if both are working?  If it is DNS TCP issue, there might be a solution in fixing firewalls/acls/iptables or such.

-- 
Bob Harold


_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list

bind-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: How to get random subset of large rrset (30+ IPs for round robin)?

Bind-Users forum mailing list
In reply to this post by David Klatt
On 3/20/20 1:14 AM, David Klatt wrote:
> Hi,

Hi,

> Now I'd like bind to just return a random subset of e.g. 5 IP
> addresses if someone requests this A record.

Hum.  That sounds quite contrary to the typical BIND behavior.

> Reason for this are in my case some (thousands) older clients (that I
> can't control) that seem not being able to handle that many IPs - the
> OS resolver just returns an error.

Ugh.

> For my use case I absolutely need to make sure that each IP of that
> large A record set is given out equally (statistically) and that at
> any time when bind answers that one A record it only returns a random
> subset of all these IPs.

I question if you need "random" or if "round robin" (rotating) would
work.  Do they need to be truly random?  Or would simply circulating a
(possibly randomized) list suffice?

> Has someone an idea on how to achieve the latter?

If cycling through a list would be sufficient, you might consider
looking at Dynamically Loadable Zones and Response Policy Service.

You might be able to create a custom DLZ driver that:
  - returned a sub-set of the results of it's own DNS query
  - returned a sub-set of the rotating list of all of the A records

You might be able to create an RPS that would alter the reply before
it's sent to clients.

Note:  My understanding is that RPS is for DNS what milters are for
Sendmail.

Finally, I don't know if will align with your needs or not, but you
might consider a forward zone pointing to a custom DNS server.

> Thanks a lot in advance!

You're welcome.  Good luck.  I'd be curious to learn what you end up doing.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die


_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list

bind-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

smime.p7s (5K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: How to get random subset of large rrset (30+ IPs for round robin)?

Mark Andrews
In reply to this post by Bob Harold


> On 21 Mar 2020, at 04:22, Bob Harold <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Do you know why the OS is having a problem?  It just occurs to me that the problem might be that the result does not fit in a UDP packet, (without EDNS?) and the fallback to TCP is not working.  Can you try 'dig ...' and 'dig +tcp ...' on that OS to see if both are working?  If it is DNS TCP issue, there might be a solution in fixing firewalls/acls/iptables or such.

It will almost always be the CPE not implementing DNS over TCP if it is a home user.  Stub resolvers fallback to TCP but if the CPE device doesn’t implement DNS over TCP the lookup will fail.  Replacing the CPE with a working CPE or reducing the number of records in the response is the work around for this.  I would be claiming the cost of the CPE devices back from the manufacture/retailer as they are not fit for purpose.

If the stub resolver does EDNS then there are CPE devices which don’t adjust the OPT record to match the minimum of the CPE's UDP buffer size and the UDP buffer size in the request and just pass through the request, this results in truncated UDP responses being returned to the client.  Adjusting the advertised UDP buffer size in the EDNS request should work around this.  Worst case you drop it to 512 bytes.

Now each additional A record takes 16 bytes to transmit (compression pointer(2), type(2), class(2), ttl(4), rdlen(2), data(4)) so with 30 A records you are looking at 480 bytes minimum + the query section + the header + the authority section.  Turning on minimal responses will help if not already enabled.

Mark

> --
> Bob Harold
>
> _______________________________________________
> Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list
>
> bind-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742              INTERNET: [hidden email]

_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list

bind-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: How to get random subset of large rrset (30+ IPs for round robin)?

m3047
In reply to this post by Bind-Users forum mailing list
It's incredibly hacky, but what about setting different nameservers
with different sets of addresses for the FQDN in question?

--

Fred

_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list

bind-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: How to get random subset of large rrset (30+ IPs for round robin)?

Matus UHLAR - fantomas
In reply to this post by Warren Kumari
>> >On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 3:14 AM David Klatt <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >> I can't find a way to do the following although I invested plenty of time
>> >> in research - maybe you guys have an idea:
>> >>
>> >> With bind, I'd need to serve a single A record with  30+  IP addresses  and
>> >> these addresses have to be returned in random order round robin,
>> >> which is done with:
>>
>> >> Now I'd like bind to just return a  random subset  of e.g. 5 IP addresses
>> >> if someone requests this A record.
>>
>> On 20.03.20 10:37, Warren Kumari wrote:
>> >I realize that this is the BIND list, but this sounds like an almost
>> >perfect example of PowerDNS's LUA record type (or something with
>> >CoreDNS)
>> >Other than that, the only thing I can think of is BIND with DLZ and a
>> >database that returns a random subset from a DB query, but that sounds
>> >awful...


>On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 1:04 PM Matus UHLAR - fantomas <[hidden email]>
>wrote:
>> I don't think BIND can do this at all. And I don't think it should...
>>
>> >> Reason for this are in my case some (thousands) older clients (that I can't control)
>> >> that seem not being able to handle that many IPs - the OS resolver just returns an error.
>>
>> why no use IPVS-like load balancer and hide all hosts behind one or two IPs?
>> that would help you much more, amongst others when any of those machines
>> fails.

On 20.03.20 13:15, Warren Kumari wrote:
>That's almost definitely the right answer, but there *are* cases where
>something like what the OP was asking for -  0.pool.ntp.org springs to
>mind as one example.
>But, yes, a load balancer / anycast is almost definitely going to be a
>better choice...

according to the OP request mentioning multiple 10.0.0.* addresses I assumes
this is not the case of IPs spread over the world but more like a server farm
providing the same services.

In that case IPVS would help.

I realize not I shouldn't have removed the IPs from my reply so it would be
more clear.
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, [hidden email] ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
"Two words: Windows survives." - Craig Mundie, Microsoft senior strategist
"So does syphillis. Good thing we have penicillin." - Matthew Alton
_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list

bind-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

AW: How to get random subset of large rrset (30+ IPs for round robin)?

David Klatt
In reply to this post by Warren Kumari




Von: bind-users <[hidden email]> im Auftrag von Warren Kumari <[hidden email]>
Gesendet: Freitag, 20. März 2020 18:15
An: bind-users
Betreff: Re: How to get random subset of large rrset (30+ IPs for round robin)?

On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 1:04 PM Matus UHLAR - fantomas
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> >On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 3:14 AM David Klatt <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> I can't find a way to do the following although I invested plenty of time
> >> in research - maybe you guys have an idea:
> >>
> >> With bind, I'd need to serve a single A record with  30+  IP addresses  and
> >> these addresses have to be returned in random order round robin,
> >> which is done with:
>
> >> Now I'd like bind to just return a  random subset  of e.g. 5 IP addresses
> >> if someone requests this A record.
>
> On 20.03.20 10:37, Warren Kumari wrote:
> >I realize that this is the BIND list, but this sounds like an almost
> >perfect example of PowerDNS's LUA record type (or something with
> >CoreDNS)
> >Other than that, the only thing I can think of is BIND with DLZ and a
> >database that returns a random subset from a DB query, but that sounds
> >awful...
>
> I don't think BIND can do this at all. And I don't think it should...
>
> >> Reason for this are in my case some (thousands) older clients (that I can't control)
> >> that seem not being able to handle that many IPs - the OS resolver just returns an error.
>
> why no use IPVS-like load balancer and hide all hosts behind one or two IPs?
> that would help you much more, amongst others when any of those machines
> fails.

>That's almost definitely the right answer, but there *are* cases where
>something like what the OP was asking for -  0.pool.ntp.org springs to
>mind as one example.
>But, yes, a load balancer / anycast is almost definitely going to be a
>better choice...
>
>Warren.



First, thanks a lot for your time and all the answers so far!

We had IPVS in front of parts of our (globally distributed) cluster in the past,
but I'd like to avoid that bottleneck and extra complexity in the future, because
application-wise the DNS round robin (random or circular doesn't matter) is
is perfectly fine for us - whenever a connection fails, the clients retries with
a different / other random server.

To get the whole picture:   we are using this to distribute tens to hundreds of
thousands of openVPN connections to currently ~80 servers across the globe and
use GeoDNS (BIND ACLs with GeoIP) to send clients to their closest part
of the cluster (anycast requires owning multiple AS numbers AFAIK, which we dont have).
Whenever openVPN disconnects or a server fails, the client
takes randomly one of ten provided remote servers in the form like:

  # openvpn config excerpt
  remote  0.vpn.example.com  1194
  remote  1.vpn.example.com  1194
  remote  2.vpn.example.com  1194
  remote  3.vpn.example.com  1194
  remote  [...]
  remote  9.vpn.example.com  1194
  remote random

So currently we already spread the IPs across these ten entries.
But as we grow, we might have more than 20 or 30 IPs per entry (the critical range
seems to start somewhere between 25 and 30, with 24 it worked at least)

I've read somewhere (sorry, can't find the page any more) that Google does it also like I wanted to do :
give out just a few (I think they do 3) random A records out of a large list of A records.
For me they wouldn't even need to be real random, it could also be cyclic, but
statistically each IP should be given out equally.

David


> --
> Matus UHLAR - fantomas, [hidden email] ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
> Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
> Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
> WinError #98652: Operation completed successfully.
> _______________________________________________
> Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list
>
> bind-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users



--
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf
_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list

bind-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

Geschäftsführer: Christoph Ostermann (CEO), Oliver Koch, Steffen Schneider, Hermann Schweizer, Tim Ulbricht.
Amtsgericht Kempten/Allgäu, Registernummer: 10655, Steuernummer 127/137/50792, USt.-IdNr. DE272208908
_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list

bind-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users