RE: [load balancing] Load-balancing DNS servers - Pros vs. Cons

From: <info@tier1.org>
Date: Tue Nov 29 2005 - 07:28:44 EST

Hi Rick,

Obviously I don't know the details of your current infrastructure or requirements, but we tend to implement DNS VServers in front of Real DNS servers for a few of the following reasons:

When we implement a DNS VServers we intercept and offload the DNS traffic and thus protect the real DNS servers from traffic surges and various types of DoS, DDoS attacks.

Using a DNS VServers masks real DNS servers IP. i.e. your DNS do not need to be directly addressable from the outside world.

As well as providing the normal SLB features i.e. Server health checking, load distribution, once created a DNS VServers is a shared entity between an HA pair of units and when combined with Link Load balancing improves local site redundancy, furthermore when combined with GSLB features will provide additional levels of global redundancy.

We use this DNS VServers technique, extensively (it is a requirement) combined with our SSLVPN services feature, for remote client’s accessing Internal / Intranet resources by DNS.

Regards

Andy Gravett
 
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lotter, Rick" <Rick.Lotter@qg.com>
To: lb-l@vegan.net
Subject: RE: [load balancing] Load-balancing DNS servers - Pros vs. Cons
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 08:25:38 -0600

>
> Odd... I never saw my own message appear on here. :)
>
> We use GSLB to load-balance web and SMTP resources, and don't plan to
> stop that. However, we are raising the question of whether or not we
> should load balance our DNS servers (externally, at least) in addition
> to our other load-balanced resources. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
>
> So my root curiosity is if anyone else has any positives or negatives
> from their research or experience.
>
> Thanks for your time!
>
>
> Rick
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lb-l@vegan.net [mailto:owner-lb-l@vegan.net] On Behalf Of
> Richard Golding
> Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 3:15 AM
> To: lb-l@vegan.net
> Subject: RE: [load balancing] Load-balancing DNS servers - Pros vs. Cons
>
>
> If your DNS servers can serve an address that it knows is able to
> respond to client requests (i.e. is up and healthy) then I would agree
> that GSLB would not be required. But the requirement for GSLB is strong
> if, in addition to always ensuring a DNS response is provided that
> response is also an intelligent response. i.e. provides high
> availability and site load balancing rather than the round robin attempt
> of load balancing by some DNS servers.
>
> Just my thoughts.
>
> Regards,
>
> Richard
>
> ____________________
> The Load Balancing Mailing List
> Unsubscribe: mailto:majordomo@vegan.net?body=unsubscribe%20lb-l
> Archive: http://vegan.net/lb/archive
> LBDigest: http://lbdigest.com
> MRTG with SLB: http://vegan.net/MRTG
> Hosted by: http://www.tokkisystems.com

____________________
The Load Balancing Mailing List
Unsubscribe: mailto:majordomo@vegan.net?body=unsubscribe%20lb-l
Archive: http://vegan.net/lb/archive
LBDigest: http://lbdigest.com
MRTG with SLB: http://vegan.net/MRTG
Hosted by: http://www.tokkisystems.com
Received on Tue Nov 29 09:33:06 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Nov 29 2005 - 09:43:21 EST