[Mehrere Froxlor Instanzen in einer Oberfläche]

Felix can't understand how you come up with a name like that and wants to know if you were high. lol

 

[Mehrere Froxlor Instanzen in einer Oberfläche]

as an aside. while discussing what we should call the panel the question was raised where the name Froxlor came from. care to shed some light on this? I remember when you guys split off syscp back then but never thought to ask about the name.

 

[Mehrere Froxlor Instanzen in einer Oberfläche]

I will get everything set up here on our end and let you know if we need any assistance regarding internals/information.

Chuck

 

[Mehrere Froxlor Instanzen in einer Oberfläche]

Hey all,

 

I am currently looking to migrate away from multiple ISPConfig installs to froxlor. However, a central Frox install to control multiple servers is not yet possible. With the new API I have talked to a few of my Devs here in house and we are kicking around the idea of making a central controller panel to control multiple frox installs.

My question is, would that be of interest to the Froxlor project in general?

 

Thanks,

Chuck

 

[Dynamic DNS in Froxlor]

Just my cents:

 

- a TTL of 1 is not conform to RFC's (at SOA's base, maybe allowed for an A record), you insert a task to froxlors cron so it takes just therefore more than 1 second

- your solution misses IPv6 support

- DNS is a fundamental service an should be high available, your updateip.php isn't

 

But all in all a nice thought an easy, lightweight solution implemented in froxlor. Thanks for sharing this.

 

Hey,

 

RFC 6781 "suggests" a minimum of 5 - 10 minute TTL for standard zone entries. Dynamic DNS was NOT conceptualized when that RFC was released. However, 1 second is a bit much. better would be 1 - 5 minutes. Irrespective of what the RFC states the TTL that is set in his script and the cronjob executing is in no way related other than the fact that the less frequent the cron run the longer the wait for the update.

 

Nothing about the stock Froxlor DNS service is HA. It is an exercise left up to the implementing admin to actually install his/her slave servers and setup the transfers. If they have done this then all is good. if not then they have much larger problems that has nothing at all to do with this script.

 

The IPv6 problem is a problem though.

 

Chuck