DNS load balancing: UDP or TCP ?
kevin.darcy at fcagroup.com
Tue Feb 19 19:07:30 UTC 2019
If you go with Anycast via BGP, make sure your network infrastructure has
"multipath" enabled, otherwise the traffic will be skewed to one node or
one source which summarizes some of the literature and standards on the
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 2:01 PM Josh Kuo <josh.kuo at gmail.com> wrote:
> Agree with Tony on TCP not going to be tried. Have you looked at using
> anycast? It is not true load balancing but it allows you to stand up
> multiple DNS servers that “shares” a single IP address.
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 12:25 AM Tony Finch <dot at dotat.at> wrote:
>> Roberto Carna <robertocarna36 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Dear, I have to balance two DNS servers for a special reason.
>> > The DNS clients are a mix of Windows, Cisco and Linux machines, so I
>> > think they ask for a FQDN using UDP and after that -if there is no
>> > response-, they ask the same FQDN using TCP, and so the load balancing
>> > will be succesful.
>> No, fallback to TCP relies on receiving a truncated UDP response. You
>> never want a DNS client to be waiting around for a response that will
>> not arrive.
>> f.anthony.n.finch <dot at dotat.at> http://dotat.at/
>> Rockall, Malin: Southeast veering southwest 6 to gale 8, occasionally 5
>> Rough or very rough. Rain. Moderate or poor.
>> Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to
>> unsubscribe from this list
>> bind-users mailing list
>> bind-users at lists.isc.org
> Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to
> unsubscribe from this list
> bind-users mailing list
> bind-users at lists.isc.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the bind-users