[NANOG] Did Youtube not pay their domain bill?

Steve Gibbard scg at gibbard.org
Sat May 3 22:10:56 UTC 2008


On Sat, 3 May 2008, Mike Lewinski wrote:

> David Coulson wrote:
>> Depends - It doesn't help if the DNS server is dead, but the front-end
>> is still advertising the routes.
>
> Possibly a good argument for allowing the DNS servers to originate the
> routes for them...? I've seen configuration where the routes were

Running Quagga or something similar on the anycasted server to announce 
the routes is the standard way of setting up anycast.  That way, if the 
server fails completely, the route goes away.

A common improvement on that is to run a script on the server that checks 
to make sure the name server process is running and responding correctly, 
and kills BGP if it isn't.  That covers cases where named has problems 
that don't take down the whole server.

The first one depends heavily on the server, if it's going to fail, 
failing the right way.  If it loses power or stops all processes, the 
route goes away and traffic gets redirected elsewhere.  If named dies or 
stops responding, you're stuck.  The second method solves a lot of that 
sort of problems, but there are still conceivable situations where the 
server would get into a state of partial failure and be unable to withdraw 
the route.  Still, that's probably the best option.  Another approach 
would be to run the monitoring script and BGP process on a separate host 
that would presumably be healthy even when the name server host is in 
trouble.  That approach has issues too, in that you lose the guarantee 
that the route will go away if the name server box is turned off.

The right solution is to design the anycast servers to be as sure as 
possible that the route will go away when you want it gone, but to have 
multiple non-interdependent anycast clouds in the NS records for each 
zone.  If the local node in one cloud does fail improperly, something will 
still be responding on the other cloud's IP address.

Note that any of these failure scenarios is still preferable to what you 
get with unicast servers.  With unicast, if the server has trouble, the 
route always stays up, and the the traffic always ends up in a black hole.

-Steve




More information about the NANOG mailing list