July 17, 2014 at 8:01 am
We have an AG group in 2 different subnets. Right now we have 2 A records in DNS which is acting as a Round Robin apparently. We don't need any load balance or switching back and forth of the IP's at the DNS level since the cluster takes care of that I think?? If this is the case, wouldn't using a CName for each address associated with the AG Listener be the more appropriate? I've looked around, it's seems like they say A record or Cname would work. Our DNS guys are not really very big on using Round Robins as there are some real drawbacks to using that as opposed to a dedicated Load Balance device. But im just not sure we are looking to load balance at all. We want IP's that resolve and the cluster to determine which IP is active. So are we unnecessarily creating a Round Robin when we use multiple A records for one listener in an AG group?
July 17, 2014 at 8:48 am
I'm not sure if you need a DNS name for an AG group, especially if the AG group is going to potentially span multiple subnets. As for the question of A-Name vs C-Name, I do know that the C-name will be the easier to set up. If you go with A-Names, you may end up trying to add the SPNs for the new A-Name manually, while Kerberos authentication works fairly straightforward with the C-Names.
July 17, 2014 at 10:13 am
Well technically the DNS is for the 'Listener' for the AG, not the AG itself. Not sure if that's what you meant. But if you have a Listener, you definitely need a dedicated IP/DNS.
Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply