Re: .ORG problems this evening

["Stephen J. Wilcox" <steve () telecomplete co uk>]

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Todd Vierling wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Jared Mauch wrote:
>
> :     ultradns uses the power of anycast to have these ips that appear
> : to be on close subnets in geographyically diverse locations.
>
> Oh, that's brilliant.  How nice of them to defeat the concept of redundancy
> by limiting me to only two of their servers for a gTLD.
>
> VeriSign might be doing some loathsome things lately, but at least my named
> has several more servers than just two to choose from.

hmm not convinced about your argument here.. perhaps you need to read more about 
how this works. 

they have two distinct servers by IP, globally they have N x clusters. i'm sure 
each instance is actualyl more than a single linux PeeCee 

within the cluster there will be health monitoring, in the event of a total loss
of the named daemons on all machines at that site that cluster will (should) 
withdraw its anycast rotues and thus send you to one of their many other 
systems. this also applies in the event of an external problem (ddos, upstream 
failure etc)

so even if what i see as tld1 now goes into failure.. for the minute or two it 
takes to go offline and reconverge on antoerh tld1 i still see tld2 

> :     could you provide some more technical details, other than
> : your postulations that they have two machines on
> : network-wise close subnets and that is the problem?
>
> I tracerouted to both IPs from two different locations in the USA; both took
> the same route before hitting !H from an ultradns.com rDNS machine.  And
> both servers for that route were completely unresponsive from both tried
> locations during the outage period.

maybe its firewalled? I see !H too but my .org is working fine for dns resolving

Steve