5 ms·

Sorry if this sounds dickish, but renting 3 servers @ $75 apiece from 3 different dedicated server companies in the USA, putting TinyDNS on them, and using them

Sorry if this sounds dickish, but renting 3 servers @ $75 apiece from 3 different dedicated server companies in the USA, putting TinyDNS on them, and using them as backup servers, would have solved your problems hours ago. Even a single quad-core server with 4GB RAM running TinyDNS could serve 10K queries per second, based on extrapolation and assumed improvements since this 2001 test, which showed nearly 4K/second performance on 700Mhz PIII CPUs: https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/2001-June/029457.html https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/2001-June/029457.... EDIT to add: and lengthening TTLs temporarily would mean that those 10K queries would quickly lessen the outage, since each query might last for 12 hours; and large ISPs like Comcast would cache the queries for all their customers, so a single successful query delivered to Comcast would have (some amount) of multiplier effect.

BoycieRules 10y ago
That does sound dickish.
- patrickg_zill 10y ago
  Thanks, account created 9 minutes ago.
  - BoycieRules 10y ago
    Just like yer dickish edits. 3 edits. Way to go. Can you not get it correct first time retard?
    - sctb 10y ago
      You can't comment like this on Hacker News. Please read the guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
nodesocket 10y ago
That's not how that sound be done. Just use a mix of two providers. Using your own servers and TinyDNS is silly for million/billion dollar companies. See MaxCDN for example who uses a mix of dns providers (AWS Route53 and NS1): ns-5.awsdns-00.com. ['205.251.192.5'] [TTL=172800] ns-926.awsdns-51.net. ['205.251.195.158'] [TTL=172800] ns-1762.awsdns-28.co.uk. ['205.251.198.226'] (NO GLUE) [TTL=172800] ns-1295.awsdns-33.org. ['205.251.197.15'] (NO GLUE) [TTL=172800] dns1.p03.nsone.net. ['198.51.44.3'] [TTL=172800] dns2.p03.nsone.net. ['198.51.45.3'] [TTL=172800] dns3.p03.nsone.net. ['198.51.44.67'] [TTL=172800] dns4.p03.nsone.net. ['198.51.45.67'] [TTL=172800] Curious, are you the kind of person that runs their own smtp email server and complains about GitHub pricing being too expensive?
- ubuntuftw 10y ago
  +1 for using a mix of two providers. That's what we do at my startup. Never had a problem since (knock on wood).
- nine_k 10y ago
  No tool is silly as long as it does the job adequately. Are paperclips silly for a billion-dollar company? If both Dyn and R53 go down, it's exactly when you want a service like PagerDuty work without a hitch.
  - jsmthrowaway 10y ago
    You're asserting that your (or their) homegrown DNS service will have better reliability than Dyn and Route53 combined. That assertion gets even worse when it's a backup because people never, ever test backups. And "ready to go" means an extremely low TTL on NS records if you need to change them (which, for a hidden backup, you will), and many resolvers ignore that when it suits them, so have fun getting back to 100% of traffic. Spoiler: I'd bet my complete net worth against your assertion and give you incredible odds. Golden rule: Fixing a DNS outage with actions that require DNS propagation = game over. You'd might as well hop in the car and start driving your content to people's homes.
464192002d7fe1c 10y ago
+1 for TinyDNS. I just wish it scaled to multiple cores :(

BoycieRules 10y ago

That does sound dickish.

patrickg_zill 10y ago
Thanks, account created 9 minutes ago.
- BoycieRules 10y ago
  Just like yer dickish edits. 3 edits. Way to go. Can you not get it correct first time retard?
  - sctb 10y ago
    You can't comment like this on Hacker News. Please read the guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

nodesocket 10y ago

That's not how that sound be done. Just use a mix of two providers. Using your own servers and TinyDNS is silly for million/billion dollar companies. See MaxCDN for example who uses a mix of dns providers (AWS Route53 and NS1): ns-5.awsdns-00.com. ['205.251.192.5'] [TTL=172800] ns-926.awsdns-51.net. ['205.251.195.158'] [TTL=172800] ns-1762.awsdns-28.co.uk. ['205.251.198.226'] (NO GLUE) [TTL=172800] ns-1295.awsdns-33.org. ['205.251.197.15'] (NO GLUE) [TTL=172800] dns1.p03.nsone.net. ['198.51.44.3'] [TTL=172800] dns2.p03.nsone.net. ['198.51.45.3'] [TTL=172800] dns3.p03.nsone.net. ['198.51.44.67'] [TTL=172800] dns4.p03.nsone.net. ['198.51.45.67'] [TTL=172800] Curious, are you the kind of person that runs their own smtp email server and complains about GitHub pricing being too expensive?

ubuntuftw 10y ago
+1 for using a mix of two providers. That's what we do at my startup. Never had a problem since (knock on wood).
nine_k 10y ago
No tool is silly as long as it does the job adequately. Are paperclips silly for a billion-dollar company? If both Dyn and R53 go down, it's exactly when you want a service like PagerDuty work without a hitch.
- jsmthrowaway 10y ago
  You're asserting that your (or their) homegrown DNS service will have better reliability than Dyn and Route53 combined. That assertion gets even worse when it's a backup because people never, ever test backups. And "ready to go" means an extremely low TTL on NS records if you need to change them (which, for a hidden backup, you will), and many resolvers ignore that when it suits them, so have fun getting back to 100% of traffic. Spoiler: I'd bet my complete net worth against your assertion and give you incredible odds. Golden rule: Fixing a DNS outage with actions that require DNS propagation = game over. You'd might as well hop in the car and start driving your content to people's homes.

464192002d7fe1c 10y ago

+1 for TinyDNS. I just wish it scaled to multiple cores :(