Hi Karol.
If I understand you correctly, the choice of address to use is up to you
and how it works best in your network. The DNS service addresses only need
to be relevant to the network they sit in and the clients that need to
reach them. In a private network, any 10 etc. address would work, as l
Klein
To: ju wusuo
Cc: "bind-users@lists.isc.org"
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2012 3:31 PM
Subject: Re: Anycast DNS - LB/LTM
Exactly. The script runs inside the LTM, and wraps "nslookup" or "dig". It
should output a distinct output for success, and another dist
> issue, stop the advertising?
>
> --
> *From:* David Klein
> *To:* ju wusuo
> *Cc:* "bind-users@lists.isc.org"
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 7, 2012 11:18 PM
> *Subject:* Re: Anycast DNS
>
>
> You would need to create a custom scr
Klein
To: ju wusuo
Cc: "bind-users@lists.isc.org"
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2012 11:18 PM
Subject: Re: Anycast DNS
You would need to create a custom script to use as your monitor, which does a
lookup of an address that you know will always be in your domain. If that
fails,
You would need to create a custom script to use as your monitor, which does
a lookup of an address that you know will always be in your domain. If that
fails, force-down/inactive the node, and tie this script as a monitor to
the pool holding the DNS server nodes.
You can advertise the /32 containi
thanks everyone for all responses with the great inputs ..
now if I want to put the DNS servers behind LBs, 1) would the LTMs be able to
announce the routes dynamically for the DNS servers, and a VIP can be withdrawn
when the site is gone? 2) would the LTMs be able to detect a DNS service
fai
In article ,
sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
> > > Have seen some anycast DNS implementations using more than one address,
> > > some times even on the same subnet, any considerations or reasons for
> > > doing that?
> >
> > We do that.
> >
> > We use two different, indepentent methods to route traffi
> > Have seen some anycast DNS implementations using more than one address,
> > some times even on the same subnet, any considerations or reasons for
> > doing that?
>
> We do that.
>
> We use two different, indepentent methods to route traffic to the IPs.
> We feel this provides a greater degre
On 29/02/12 03:55, ju wusuo wrote:
Have seen some anycast DNS implementations using more than one address,
some times even on the same subnet, any considerations or reasons for
doing that?
We do that.
We use two different, indepentent methods to route traffic to the IPs.
We feel this provides
On 01/03/12 03:40, Beavis wrote:
Just want to piggy back on this topic is there any documentation
available online that shows a deployment guideline for Anycast?
There's not much to it:
1. Create the anycast IP on your servers
2. Route the anycast IP to your servers
3. Make bind listen on t
2012/3/1 Beavis
> Just want to piggy back on this topic is there any documentation
> available online that shows a deployment guideline for Anycast?
>
> -beavis
>
What about RFC 4786?
> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Warren Kumari wrote:
> >
> > On Feb 29, 2012, at 11:00 AM, Todd Snyder wr
Just want to piggy back on this topic is there any documentation
available online that shows a deployment guideline for Anycast?
-beavis
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Warren Kumari wrote:
>
> On Feb 29, 2012, at 11:00 AM, Todd Snyder wrote:
>
>> The reason I’ve heard a few times is that user
On Feb 29, 2012, at 11:00 AM, Todd Snyder wrote:
> The reason I’ve heard a few times is that users are uncomfortable using only
> 1 address. In the past I’ve done 2 or 3 addresses just so that we can give
> out 3 addresses that all point to the same pool of servers.
>
> Silly, I know, but so
The reason I've heard a few times is that users are uncomfortable using only 1
address. In the past I've done 2 or 3 addresses just so that we can give out 3
addresses that all point to the same pool of servers.
Silly, I know, but sometimes it's easier to placate than to change
someone/groups
In article ,
Oliver Garraux wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 8:33 AM, takizo wrote:
> > Ju,
> >
> > What do you mean on more than one address?
> >
> > --
> > Paul Ooi
> >
> >
> >
> > On Feb 29, 2012, at 11:55 AM, ju wusuo wrote:
> >
> > Have seen some anycast DNS implementations using more than
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 8:33 AM, takizo wrote:
> Ju,
>
> What do you mean on more than one address?
>
> --
> Paul Ooi
>
>
>
> On Feb 29, 2012, at 11:55 AM, ju wusuo wrote:
>
> Have seen some anycast DNS implementations using more than one address, some
> times even on the same subnet, any consider
Ju,
What do you mean on more than one address?
--
Paul Ooi
On Feb 29, 2012, at 11:55 AM, ju wusuo wrote:
> Have seen some anycast DNS implementations using more than one address, some
> times even on the same subnet, any considerations or reasons for doing that?
>
>
>
> _
17 matches
Mail list logo
