Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: QWest is having some pretty nice DNS issues right now
From: Martin Hannigan <hannigan () world std com>
Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 10:09:07 -0500 (EST)




Steve Gibbard wrote:
So from my uninformed vantage point, it looks like they started doing 
this more or less right -- two servers or clusters of servers in two 
different facilities, a few thousand miles apart on different power 
grids and not subject to the same natural disasters.  In other words, 
they did the hard part.  What they didn't do is put them in different 
BGP routes, which for a network with as much IP space as Qwest has would 
seem fairly easy.


I didn't get to play detective at the time of the outage, but 
configutation (which is automatically replicated) may also have been 
enough to take out both nameservers.

It also makes good management sense to run your nameservers with the 
same software and versions, but perhaps it doesn't make good continuity 
sense.. ?

That may not be necessarily true. Vendor diversity is not a bad idea.
It's expensive support wise, but you could run different h/w and 
bind at two locations. This is perfectly acceptable operationally,
AFAIK. Security is another story. That depends largely on people these
days so YMMV.

Anyhow, does anyone know what really happened?

-M<


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]