maybe a dumb idea on how to fix the dns problems i don't know....
jgreco at ns.sol.net
Sun Aug 10 20:16:06 CDT 2008
> > Pretending for a moment that it was even possible to make such large
> > scale changes and get them pushed into a large enough number of clients
> > to matter, you're talking about meltdown at the recurser level, because
> > it isn't just one connection per _computer_, but one connection per
> > _resolver stub_ per _computer_ (which, on a UNIX machine, would tend to
> > gravitate towards one connection per process), and this just turns into
> > an insane number of sockets you have to manage.
> Couldn't the resolver libraries be changed to not use multiple connections?
I think that the text I wrote clearly assumes that there IS only one
connection per resolver instance. The problem is that hostname to IP
lookup is pervasive in a modern UNIX system, and is probably pretty
common on other platforms, too, so you have potentially hundreds or
thousands of processes, each eating up additional system file descriptors
for this purpose.
I cannot think of any reason that init, getty, sh, cron, or a few other
things on a busy system would need to use the resolver library - but that
leaves a whole ton of things that can and do.
Now, of course, you can /change/ how everything works. Stop holding open
connections persistently, and a lot of the trouble is reduced. However,
anyone who has done *any* work in the area of TCP services that are open
to the public will be happy to stamp "Fraught With Peril" on this little
project - and to understand why, I suggest you research all the work that
has been put into defending services like http, irc, etc.
Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net
"We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] then I
won't contact you again." - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail spam(CNN)
With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too many apples.
More information about the NANOG