nanog mailing list archives
Re: Numbering nameservers and resolvers
From: "Robert E. Seastrom" <rs () seastrom com>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 09:37:09 -0400
Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike () swm pp se> writes:
On Tue, 17 Aug 2010, Nick Olsen wrote:So lets say that you have multiple DNS resolvers in the same ip space that you advertise from multiple locations. All would be fine for the most part. But if you had a location equidistant network wise from two POP's wouldn't it load balance and possibly break some TCP sessions? How would someone get around this? This is also what OpenDNS does from what I understand.Usually network do not loadshare per-packet on BGP, so a TCP session will "always" go to the same dns server, at least for the short duration this TCP session lives.
Occasionally I have seen networks (usually small dual-homed ones) that attempt to equally utilize their network pipes by doing per-packet bgp load balancing to both upstreams. Then they wonder why their performance is so irregular. :-) -r
Current thread:
- Re: Numbering nameservers and resolvers, (continued)
- Re: Numbering nameservers and resolvers Aria Stewart (Aug 16)
- Re: Numbering nameservers and resolvers Valdis . Kletnieks (Aug 16)
- Re: Numbering nameservers and resolvers Jeremy Kister (Aug 16)
- Re: Numbering nameservers and resolvers Randy Bush (Aug 16)
- Re: Numbering nameservers and resolvers Arie Vayner (Aug 16)
- Re: Numbering nameservers and resolvers Jeroen Massar (Aug 16)
- Re: Numbering nameservers and resolvers Doug Barton (Aug 16)
- Re: Numbering nameservers and resolvers Graham Beneke (Aug 17)
- Re: Numbering nameservers and resolvers Nick Olsen (Aug 17)
- Re: Numbering nameservers and resolvers Mikael Abrahamsson (Aug 17)
- Re: Numbering nameservers and resolvers Robert E. Seastrom (Aug 18)
- Re: Numbering nameservers and resolvers Mikael Abrahamsson (Aug 17)