On 11/11/2009 04:50 PM, Corey Edwards wrote:
Ryan Byrd wrote:having a super short TTL is a great way to overload your DNS servers and clients don't have to honor the TTL anyway and will often cache the records. IE caches records for 30 mins, I believe, for example.I will vouch for that fact. Even worse, Outlook Express will cache until it is shutdown.Another trick some setups use is to order DNS replies so that the primary/nearest/best is listed first and the secondary/farthest/worst follow. Well that's all well and good until it runs through another DNS server who is not bound to honor that ordering, and typically will not. Here are a few URLs I've bookmarked on the topic. HTH http://homepages.tesco.net/J.deBoynePollard/FGA/dns-round-robin-is-useless.html http://tenereillo.com./GSLBPageOfShame.htm http://www.zytrax.com/books/dns/ch9/rr.html Corey
Even many clients don't follow the order you give them. In fact, windows (up through vista, don't know about 7) tend to have some broken method of figuring out the response time of all of it's resolvers, and then use the slowest, most overloaded of them. Truly annoying from a server farm perspective.
And yes, 5 seconds TTLs do tend to pound on the servers more, but not all that bad if the server is authoritative (ie, already has the zone and doesn't have to go look for it) and has relatively current hardware. My DNS servers are pushing about 1500 queries per second (each) and have been tested to about 9000 per second.
-Steve
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
/* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
