On Sat, 2006-05-13 at 14:22 -0700, William Chops Westfield wrote:
> On May 13, 2006, at 2:01 PM, Herbert Graf wrote:
> >
> > Actually it's the best solution when you've run out of bandwidth. By
> > redirecting to 127.0.0.1 you effectively use the least possible
> > bandwidth per hit without actually having to turn off anything.
> >
> >
> DNS entries aren't supposed to have timeouts so low that changing
> the address is useful for anything as dynamic as fixing bandwidth
> limitations; the previous address is very likely to be cached in
> DNS servers all over the world for timeouts in the range of DAYS.

I've seen it used for these reasons.

I know for a fact of one site where their host changed their dns entry
to localhost due to unpaid bills.

> THe only use for 127.0.0.1 in a DNS table that I can think of is
> if the site has some under some sort of DDOS attack based on a
> bug they need to fix in a leisurely manner...

But that suffers the same delay you are speaking of. In all cases I've
seen it used the operators were NOT concerned about getting the site
back quickly, only to stop incoming connections.

TTYL

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist