North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: DNS Based Load Balancers

  • From: Henry Linneweh
  • Date: Thu Jul 06 12:19:23 2006
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024;; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=xNU4Y/MlkJ+ehAYEQl8s+hHtGhOYb8Mxy1bUKkel325pjWwD1r/c2CY8ixL9ib2BSF6cJun0WzexQiHdXVnrBcPSgijuaeNq8RU8VN41dN+VupvMXOhPwwXzWtXhghDXpPtjYo23HnchMeQXoaE3MqgR3floa9fOAd7Y774udto= ;

There is a new player on the block that I see more and more

----- Original Message ----
From: Paul Vixie <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2006 11:16:39 AM
Subject: Re: DNS Based Load Balancers

> As someone who has also deployed GSLB's with hardware applicances I would
> also like to know real world problems and issues people are running into
> "today" on modern GSLB implementations and not theoretical ones, as far
> as I can tell our GSLB deployment was very straight forward and works
> flawlessly.

since "works flawlessly" could just mean that you don't have any reported
problems with the technology -- no complaints from your users, no bugs logged
with your vendor, etc, i have two bracketing questions.

    first, have you measured the improvement you got -- in terms of
    min/max/avg/stddev of TTFB/TTLB (time to first byte / last byte)
    with the appliances turned on vs. turned off?

    second, have you measured the dns damage your gslb might cause or
    contribute to, due to things not responding to unhandled QTYPES
    (AAAA comes to mind) or use of abnormally low DNS TTL?

i'm not as much interested in whether a technology causes no problems for its
operator as whether its cost:benefit is worthwhile to the internet community.
Paul Vixie