Skip to main content

linux - Correct way to set up DNS primary/secondary/... for redundancy and latency reduction?

I thought DNS primary/secondary for redundancy purposes
was straightforward. My understanding is that you should have a primary and at least one
secondary, and that you should set up your secondary in a geographically different
location, but also behind a different router (see for example href="https://serverfault.com/questions/48087/why-are-there-several-nameservers-for-my-domain"
title="this
question">https://serverfault.com/questions/48087/why-are-there-several-nameservers-for-my-domain)



Currently,
we have two name servers both in our main data center. Recently, we've suffered some
outages for various reasons that took out both name servers, and left us and our
customers without working DNS for a few hours. I've asked my sysadmin team to finish
setting up a DNS server in another data center and configure it as the secondary name
server.



However, our sysadmins claim that this
doesn't help much if the other data center is not at least as dependable as the primary
data center. They claim that most clients will still fail to look up properly, or time
out too long, when the primary data center is
down.



Personally, I'm convinced we're not the
only company with this kind of problem and that it most likely is already a solved
problem. I can't imagine all those internet companies being affected by our kind of
problem. However, I can't find good online docs that explain what happens in failure
cases (for example, client timeouts) and how to work around
them.



What arguments can I use to poke holes in
our sysadmins' reasoning ? Any online resources I can consult to better understand the
problems they claim exist ?




Some
additional notes after reading the
replies:




  • we're on
    Linux

  • we have additional complicated DNS needs; our DNS
    entries are managed by some custom software, with BIND currently slaving from a Twisted
    DNS implementation, and some views in the mix as well. However we're completely capable
    of setting up our own DNS servers at another data
    center.

  • I'm talking about authoritative DNS for outsiders
    to find our servers, not recursive DNS servers for our local clients.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

linux - iDRAC6 Virtual Media native library cannot be loaded

When attempting to mount Virtual Media on a iDRAC6 IP KVM session I get the following error: I'm using Ubuntu 9.04 and: $ javaws -version Java(TM) Web Start 1.6.0_16 $ uname -a Linux aud22419-linux 2.6.28-15-generic #51-Ubuntu SMP Mon Aug 31 13:39:06 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux $ firefox -version Mozilla Firefox 3.0.14, Copyright (c) 1998 - 2009 mozilla.org On Windows + IE it (unsurprisingly) works. I've just gotten off the phone with the Dell tech support and I was told it is known to work on Linux + Firefox, albeit Ubuntu is not supported (by Dell, that is). Has anyone out there managed to mount virtual media in the same scenario?
Post a Comment
Read more

hp proliant - Smart Array P822 with HBA Mode?

We get an HP DL360 G8 with an Smart Array P822 controller. On that controller will come a HP StorageWorks D2700 . Does anybody know, that it is possible to run the Smart Array P822 in HBA mode? I found only information about the P410i, who can run HBA. If this is not supported, what you think about the LSI 9207-8e controller? Will this fit good in that setup? The Hardware we get is used but all original from HP. The StorageWorks has 25 x 900 GB SAS 10K disks. Because the disks are not new I would like to use only 22 for raid6, and the rest for spare (I need to see if the disk count is optimal or not for zfs). It would be nice if I'm not stick to SAS in future. As OS I would like to install debian stretch with zfs 0.71 as file system and software raid. I have see that hp has an page for debian to. I would like to use hba mode because it is recommend, that zfs know at most as possible about the disk, and I'm independent from the raid controller. For us zfs have many benefits,
Post a Comment
Read more

apache 2.2 - Server Potentially Compromised -- c99madshell

So, low and behold, a legacy site we've been hosting for a client had a version of FCKEditor that allowed someone to upload the dreaded c99madshell exploit onto our web host. I'm not a big security buff -- frankly I'm just a dev currently responsible for S/A duties due to a loss of personnel. Accordingly, I'd love any help you server-faulters could provide in assessing the damage from the exploit. To give you a bit of information: The file was uploaded into a directory within the webroot, "/_img/fck_uploads/File/". The Apache user and group are restricted such that they can't log in and don't have permissions outside of the directory from which we serve sites. All the files had 770 permissions (user rwx, group rwx, other none) -- something I wanted to fix but was told to hold off on as it wasn't "high priority" (hopefully this changes that). So it seems the hackers could've easily executed the script. Now I wasn't able
Post a Comment
Read more