Anycast provider for SMTP?

Kurt Kraut listas at kurtkraut.net
Thu Jun 18 08:13:19 UTC 2015


Ray,


"Anycast is generally not well-suited for stateful connectivity (e.g. most
things TCP)."

I don't know anything that would support that claim. I have been using for
years BGP anycast for audio and video streaming, always in TCP (RTMP, HLS,
WMS, and even the good and old ShoutCast) and works like a charm. And this
is the 'secret sauce' of the company I work for, the thing we do better
than our competitors that make our users happy and never wanting to leave
us: anycast.

We have customers that are TV stations and stream 24x7x365 their content
and they have watchers getting their streaming also 24x7x365 (like waiting
rooms, airports) with no complaints or instability.


Best regards,


Kurt Kraut

2015-06-17 16:13 GMT-03:00 Ray Soucy <rps at maine.edu>:

> Anycast is generally not well-suited for stateful connectivity (e.g. most
> things TCP).  The use case for anycast is restricted to simple
> challenge-response protocol design.
>
> As such, you typically only see it leveraged for simple services (e.g. DNS,
> NTP).
>
> The reason for this, as you suspect, is you can never guarantee that the
> path and thus the server will remain consistent across client connections.
>
> Ideally you can leverage DNS to provide a response to a unicast resource
> rather than trying to make the service itself anycast.  DNS can be anycast,
> and DNS can provide different responses based on geographical location, but
> these can happen independently or together.
>
> As you still want failover, you might opt to announce the MX record with
> the priorities reversed but still pointing to each server.  For example MX
> 10 server1, MX 20 server2 on one side, and MX 10 server2, MX 20 server1 on
> the other.
>
> Typically you would use a DNS load balancer rather than simple anycast DNS
> to achieve this though.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Joe Hamelin <joe at nethead.com> wrote:
>
> > I have a mail system where there are two MX hosts, one in the US and one
> in
> > Europe.  Both have a DNS MX record metric of 10 so a bastardized
> > round-robin takes place.  This does not work so well when one site goes
> > down.   My solution will be to place a load balancer in a hosting site
> > (virtual, of course) and have it provide HA.  But what about HA for the
> > LB?  At first glance anycasting would seem to be a great idea but there
> is
> > a problem of broken sessions when routes change.
> >
> > Have any of you seen something like this work in the wild?
> >
> >
> > --
> > Joe Hamelin, W7COM, Tulalip, WA, 360-474-7474
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Ray Patrick Soucy
> Network Engineer
> University of Maine System
>
> T: 207-561-3526
> F: 207-561-3531
>
> MaineREN, Maine's Research and Education Network
> www.maineren.net
>



More information about the NANOG mailing list