If I follow you right, the biggest issue would be the TTL of the DNS
records. If you're using ns1, and everything resolves to the addresses
contained in it at location 1, then if failover occurs to ns2, and
thus site
2, that would work for "new" requests for DNS information. But, cached
information, which is usually at least an hour or more, would still
try to
resolve to the old IP's. If site 1 is down, then traffic bound for
site 1
(Cached requests) would fail.
I may not have understood what you were trying to say though..
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: South Computers [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday,
May 30, 2010 11:17 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [qmailtoaster] Opinions Please
That looks interesting.
Been thinking about this myself a lot lately (failover, not load
balancing, especially for http). Being in hurricane alley I think
about this this time every year. Not too worried about mail, as I
just use smtp routes to point everything back to primary mail server(s).
I use dnsmadeeasy's failover services for my "must be up" sites, but
wondering.. I have a sneaky idea. Maybe.
Might I be cheating a bit if I were to:
Setup a couple of domains on dnsmadeeasy (or any service that does
failover reliably), and add failover service to each.
Add records for ns1, ns2, whatever to each.
Setup a dns server on each machine (different geographical locations).
Each dns server would be configured to point to it's own set of
records (for that location)
Setup failover for ns1, ns2, etc at failover dns service to rollover
to the live dns server, thus effectively "failovering" all records
for everything on the dns server.
With hundreds of domains, this could save a lot of money paying for
individual failover service.
Does this make sense?
Thoughts?
Scott Hughes wrote:
I am considering setting up a second QMT server using Jake's
replicated server tutorial. These servers will be in two different
cities for maximum redundancy. If I remember correctly, Jake
mentioned setting up DNS round robin to balance the two QMT servers.
My question is this: Is DNS better for load balancing, or would it
be better to utilize a load balancing program like 'balance'
(http://www.inlab.de/balance.html) ? Or does it really make a
difference for this application. I would be balancing IMAP (993) /
SMTP (25) / POP3 (110).
Thanks,
Scott
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Qmailtoaster is sponsored by Vickers Consulting Group
(www.vickersconsulting.com)
Vickers Consulting Group offers Qmailtoaster support and
installations.
If you need professional help with your setup, contact them today!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Please visit qmailtoaster.com for the latest news, updates, and
packages.
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
[email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail:
[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Qmailtoaster is sponsored by Vickers Consulting Group
(www.vickersconsulting.com)
Vickers Consulting Group offers Qmailtoaster support and
installations.
If you need professional help with your setup, contact them today!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please visit qmailtoaster.com for the latest news, updates, and
packages.
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
[email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail:
[email protected]
