Jimmy,
On May 28, 2012, at 9:58 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
> The purpose of using a registrar is to establish DNS delegation, not
> to validate your site's redundancy meets the absolute best possible
> practices for fault tolerance.
Terminology nit: the purpose of a registrar is to allow folks the fre
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 06:56:29PM -0500,
Brett Frankenberger wrote
a message of 15 lines which said:
> How does your employer know if two nameservers (two IP addresses) are
> on the same subnet?
The current heuristic for IPv4 is "belongs in the same /28" (and /64
for IPv6). Otherwise, Mark A
> It is more important that a domain registrar not refuse to register a
> domain, or erroneously declare a valid listing invalid.
>
> The purpose of using a registrar is to establish DNS delegation, not
> to validate your site's redundancy meets the absolute best possible
> practices for fault tol
On 5/28/12, David Conrad wrote:
> On May 28, 2012, at 11:51 AM, Anurag Bhatia wrote:
>> I know few registry/registrars
>> which do not accept both (or all) name servers of domain name on same
>> subnet. They demand at least 1 DNS server should be on different subnet for
>> failover reasons (old th
In message <5ebc0868-05d2-435e-a671-e957af72f...@one.com>, Mikkel Mondrup Krist
ensen writes:
>
> On May 29, 2012, at 01:56 , Brett Frankenberger wrote:
>
> > On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 09:32:29PM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 12:21:10AM +0530,
> >> Anurag Bhatia w
On May 29, 2012, at 01:56 , Brett Frankenberger wrote:
> On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 09:32:29PM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 12:21:10AM +0530,
>> Anurag Bhatia wrote
>> a message of 28 lines which said:
>>
>>> I know few registry/registrars which do not accept both
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 09:32:29PM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 12:21:10AM +0530,
> Anurag Bhatia wrote
> a message of 28 lines which said:
>
> > I know few registry/registrars which do not accept both (or all)
> > name servers of domain name on same subnet.
>
>
hatia
>> Cc : NANOG Mailing List
>> Objet : Re: DNS anycasting - multiple DNS servers on same subnet Vs
>> registrar/registry policies
>> Envoyé : 28 mai, 2012 17:03
>> ...
>> Envoyé par mon BlackBerry de Digicel
>
> QED, eh?
maxlarson.he...@transversal.ht wrote:
> Q
> --Message d'origine--
> De : Randy Bush
> À : Anurag Bhatia
> Cc : NANOG Mailing List
> Objet : Re: DNS anycasting - multiple DNS servers on same subnet Vs
> registrar/registry policies
> Envoyé : 28 mai, 2012
Q
--Message d'origine--
De : Randy Bush
À : Anurag Bhatia
Cc : NANOG Mailing List
Objet : Re: DNS anycasting - multiple DNS servers on same subnet Vs
registrar/registry policies
Envoyé : 28 mai, 2012 17:03
> I am building redundancy within that setup. I mean it will be software
> I am building redundancy within that setup. I mean it will be software
> based BGP so if hardware if fried up, it will break BGP session and pull
> off routes anyway and for cases like DNS server (software) failure, I will
> monitor it via simple bash script which can turn bgp daemon down. So onc
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> On May 28, 2012, at 15:24 , Anurag Bhatia wrote:
> > On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
> >> Anurag Bhatia wrote:
> >>>
> >>> One small concern I wanted to discuss here. I know few
> >>> registry/registrars which do no
On May 28, 2012, at 15:24 , Anurag Bhatia wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
>> Anurag Bhatia wrote:
>>>
>>> One small concern I wanted to discuss here. I know few
>>> registry/registrars which do not accept both (or all) name servers of
>>> domain name on same subnet.
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 12:21:10AM +0530,
Anurag Bhatia wrote
a message of 28 lines which said:
> I know few registry/registrars which do not accept both (or all)
> name servers of domain name on same subnet.
Since my employer is one of these registries, let me mention that I
fully agree with
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
> Anurag Bhatia wrote:
> >
> > One small concern I wanted to discuss here. I know few
> > registry/registrars which do not accept both (or all) name servers of
> > domain name on same subnet. They demand at least 1 DNS server should be
> > on d
Anurag Bhatia wrote:
>
> One small concern I wanted to discuss here. I know few
> registry/registrars which do not accept both (or all) name servers of
> domain name on same subnet. They demand at least 1 DNS server should be
> on different subnet for failover reasons (old thoughts).
>
> How one c
Anurag,
On May 28, 2012, at 11:51 AM, Anurag Bhatia wrote:
> I know few registry/registrars
> which do not accept both (or all) name servers of domain name on same
> subnet. They demand at least 1 DNS server should be on different subnet for
> failover reasons (old thoughts).
IMHO appropriately s
Greetings everyone!
One small concern I wanted to discuss here. I know few registry/registrars
which do not accept both (or all) name servers of domain name on same
subnet. They demand at least 1 DNS server should be on different subnet for
failover reasons (old thoughts).
How one can deal with
18 matches
Mail list logo
