3 ms·
1.1.1.1 does not operate in isolation. It is designed to be used in conjunction with 1.0.0.1. DNS has fault tolerance built in. Did 1.0.0.1 go down too? If
by sneak 1y ago
1.1.1.1 does not operate in isolation.
It is designed to be used in conjunction with 1.0.0.1. DNS has fault tolerance built in.
Did 1.0.0.1 go down too? If so, why were they on the same infrastructure?
This makes no sense to me. 8.8.8.8 also has 8.8.4.4. The whole point is that it can go down at any time and everything keeps working.
Shouldn’t the fix be to ensure that these are served out of completely independent silos and update all docs to make sure anyone using 1.1.1.1 also has 1.0.0.1 configured as a backup?
If I ran a service like this I would regularly do blackouts or brownouts on the primary to make sure that people’s resolvers are configured correctly. Nobody should be using a single IP as a point of failure for their internet access/browsing.
- detaro 1y agoYou don't need to test if peoples resolvers handle this cleanly, because its already known that many don't. DNS fallback behavior across platforms is a mess.
- notpushkin 1y ago> Did 1.0.0.1 go down too? Yes. > Shouldn’t the fix be to ensure that these are served out of completely independent silos [...]? Yes. > If so, why were they on the same infrastructure? Apparently, they weren’t independent enough: something in CF has announced both addresses and that got out. The solution for the end user is, of course, to use 1.1.1.1 and 8.8.8.8 (or any other combination of two different resolvers).