Re: Low Cost 10G Router
On 20/May/15 19:44, Alain Hebert wrote: Cisco I don't know about the licensing for the ASR but I mostly deal with second hand devices. They are not flashy but do the job. If you are not trying to enable any IOS XR PIE's that need licenses (like video monitoring or optical monitoring), the only license worries you'll have on the ASR9001 is the ASR9001-S. The ASR9001-S is a 60Gbps version of the ASR9001 (50% capacity). You can upgrade the ASR9001-S to the ASR9001 with a software license. Mark.
Re: Low Cost 10G Router
BGP is still atrocious on the CCRs, but that's because the route update process isn't multithreaded. I recently took a close look at this, and that the update process is single-threaded is not the major problem so long as churn is not too great. The problem is that due to a deeper problem the entire forwarding table needs to be recalculated for *each* update. This means that even with the usual background noise in the DFZ the daemon is constantly updating everything. There are other bugs as well such as not supporting recursive next hop (e.g. via OSPF) lookup for IPv6 which means that if you have any iBGP sessions and more than one internal path you're out of luck with no obvious workaround. The stock answer from Mikrotik is that everything will be fixed in the next major release of the OS. When that happens, and how long it takes to shake out the inevitable new bugs is an open question. Personally I give it at least a year before we would even try to use these seriously for BGP. Until then, it's FreeBSD and BIRD. Best, -w -- William Waites wwai...@tardis.ed.ac.uk | School of Informatics http://tardis.ed.ac.uk/~wwaites/ | University of Edinburgh https://hubs.net.uk/ | HUBS AS60241 The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336. pgpzURxPW91or.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Peering and Network Cost
James, curious to know... what size ISPs are they? In the last few years with the larger ones it has always been about lowering cost and increasing revenue, which throws the original idea of peering out the window (unless you are willing to pay). On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 4:52 AM, James Bensley jwbens...@gmail.com wrote: On 17 April 2015 at 16:53, Justin Wilson - MTIN li...@mtin.net wrote: Peering and peering on an exchange are two different things. Peering at an exchange has several benefits other than the simple cost of transit. If you are in a large data center which charges fees for cross connects a single cross connect to an exchange can save you money. Peering can also be a sales tool. If you buy from a VOIP provider and are peered with them your latency and such will go down. You also have more control over the QOS over that peer. This can be spun into marketing. Not to toot our own horn but we put together a list of benefits for our IX customers: http://www.midwest-ix.com/blog/?p=15 Also, a good article at: http://blog.webserver.com.my/index.php/the-benefits-of-hosting-at-internet-exchange-point/ I also have a similar working document that I'd welcome feedback on to improve; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1i2bPZDt75hAwcR4iKMqaNSGIeM-nJSWLZ6SLTTnuXNs/edit?usp=sharing I've used it once to help an ISP evalutate peering and started them in the world of public peering. I'm now going through that proces again with another ISP and again they will start public peering soon, having used this doc in both cases as an intro/FAQ for them. Cheers, James.
Re: Measuring DNS Performance Graphing Logs
Hi Zayed, I think you're more likely to get good answers to your BIND-specific questions on the bind-users mailing list. See: https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users BIND9 has the capability to produce a vast variety and volume of logs, and dealing with logs in general is something that there are solutions for. Maybe look at logstash/elasticsearch as a starting point. Other BIND9 users on the bind-users list will no doubt have advice about what types logs they think are important. Recent releases of BIND9 can export a variety of statistics in XML and JSON formats using HTTP. Pulling those out and sending them to cacti/graphite/whatever is also a fairly non-DNS-specific problem to have. Advice for tuning a BIND9 recursive resolver's cache can be found in a tech note published by ISC; if that's not especially relevant to modern releases (I seem to think it was published some time ago) you could again look to the bind-users list for advice. For authority-only servers, your main concern is whether you have enough RAM to hold all your zone data. If you do, and if your server was built this decade and has no hardware faults, chances are you're good. Deciding whether your servers struggling to keep up with the load of the software you're running on it is another problem that is not specific to the DNS. Check with whoever provides your operating system for advice; look in to system statistics collection using things like collectd and publish somewhere you can record data and identify long-term trends so you know what looks normal (since until you know what normal looks like, you can't tell what a problem looks like). You can use commercial services like catchpoint and thousandeyes to check that your authoritative nameservers are suitably responsive. You can use non-commercial services like Atlas to do the same thing. If you've connected your nameservers to the network in such a way that there's a stateful firewall between the server and its clients, the report to your boss could be very brief and accurate; something like service expected to fail at any time; explosion imminent would do it. Joe On 21 May 2015, at 7:15, Zayed Mahmud wrote: Thanks a lot to Denis Fondras, Zachary, Andrew Smith, Christopher Morrow for your valuable advice. I've tried cacti but failed to get desired logs. i've also tried bind graph...but it consumes too much memory in the long run. can u suggest some suitable tools that i can measure the performance of the dns servers? like what shud b active and what shud not be in general safe dns server practice and check against my own settings or whatever the tool can query, something like nmap. this would be really helpful. i just need to make a report about my dns servers for my boss...and i'm clueless what to point out and what not to or how to evaluate it's performance. i'm running bind9 under unix environment. thanks in advance. On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 11:34 PM, Zayed Mahmud zayed.mah...@gmail.com wrote: Hello! This is my first message to NANOG's mailing list. I hope someone can help me. I was wondering which tool(s) can I use to measure the performance of my 3 DNS servers (1 primary, 1 secondary, 1 solely cacheDNS)? From the stats I would like to know if my DNS server is serving as it should be or if any of it's options are set inappropriately and others alike. I looked for a while but could not find any. Any help would be highly appreciated. I am running bind9 on UNIX platform. Question 2) I would also like to know how can I graph my DNS logs? And how can I integrate it to my CACTI server as well? I couldn't find any suitable plugin. Any suggestion? -- -- Best Regards, *Zayed Mahmud* *Senior Core IP Network Team,* *Banglalion Communications Limited, Bangladesh.* -- -- Best Regards, *Zayed Mahmud.*
Re: Measuring DNS Performance Graphing Logs
Zayed, What issues did you run into when trying to monitor Bind with Cacti ? here is a nice write up on this: http://gregsowell.com/?p=4763 If you don't find yourself getting far with this, then you can always use the Captain James T. Kirk's way of solving Kobayashi Maru (Use powerdns instead of bind, powerdns has stats built in). Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Zayed Mahmud zayed.mah...@gmail.com To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 7:15:41 AM Subject: Re: Measuring DNS Performance Graphing Logs Thanks a lot to Denis Fondras, Zachary, Andrew Smith, Christopher Morrow for your valuable advice. I've tried cacti but failed to get desired logs. i've also tried bind graph...but it consumes too much memory in the long run. can u suggest some suitable tools that i can measure the performance of the dns servers? like what shud b active and what shud not be in general safe dns server practice and check against my own settings or whatever the tool can query, something like nmap. this would be really helpful. i just need to make a report about my dns servers for my boss...and i'm clueless what to point out and what not to or how to evaluate it's performance. i'm running bind9 under unix environment. thanks in advance. On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 11:34 PM, Zayed Mahmud zayed.mah...@gmail.com wrote: Hello! This is my first message to NANOG's mailing list. I hope someone can help me. I was wondering which tool(s) can I use to measure the performance of my 3 DNS servers (1 primary, 1 secondary, 1 solely cacheDNS)? From the stats I would like to know if my DNS server is serving as it should be or if any of it's options are set inappropriately and others alike. I looked for a while but could not find any. Any help would be highly appreciated. I am running bind9 on UNIX platform. Question 2) I would also like to know how can I graph my DNS logs? And how can I integrate it to my CACTI server as well? I couldn't find any suitable plugin. Any suggestion? -- -- Best Regards, *Zayed Mahmud* *Senior Core IP Network Team,* *Banglalion Communications Limited, Bangladesh.* -- -- Best Regards, *Zayed Mahmud.*
Re: Peering and Network Cost
As a small ISP, I'll peer with everybody possible. ;-) It's mostly about cost, but the quality goes up as well. Some of the people we're working with saw an increase in consumption the moment they joined IXes. The quality of the connections improved, so the streaming video (assumed) was able to flow at a higher bit-rate. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com - Original Message - From: Rafael Possamai raf...@gav.ufsc.br To: James Bensley jwbens...@gmail.com Cc: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 7:40:23 AM Subject: Re: Peering and Network Cost James, curious to know... what size ISPs are they? In the last few years with the larger ones it has always been about lowering cost and increasing revenue, which throws the original idea of peering out the window (unless you are willing to pay). On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 4:52 AM, James Bensley jwbens...@gmail.com wrote: On 17 April 2015 at 16:53, Justin Wilson - MTIN li...@mtin.net wrote: Peering and peering on an exchange are two different things. Peering at an exchange has several benefits other than the simple cost of transit. If you are in a large data center which charges fees for cross connects a single cross connect to an exchange can save you money. Peering can also be a sales tool. If you buy from a VOIP provider and are peered with them your latency and such will go down. You also have more control over the QOS over that peer. This can be spun into marketing. Not to toot our own horn but we put together a list of benefits for our IX customers: http://www.midwest-ix.com/blog/?p=15 Also, a good article at: http://blog.webserver.com.my/index.php/the-benefits-of-hosting-at-internet-exchange-point/ I also have a similar working document that I'd welcome feedback on to improve; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1i2bPZDt75hAwcR4iKMqaNSGIeM-nJSWLZ6SLTTnuXNs/edit?usp=sharing I've used it once to help an ISP evalutate peering and started them in the world of public peering. I'm now going through that proces again with another ISP and again they will start public peering soon, having used this doc in both cases as an intro/FAQ for them. Cheers, James.
Re: bing on v6
And www.frontier.com has been broken for 6 days. Works fine for me over v6 although the chain of TLS certificates looks kind of funky. R's, John
RE: bing on v6
There are several properties that used to work and do not anymore: wireless.att.com www.att.net www.charter.com www.globalcrossing.com John B. told me a couple of days ago to stand by for dns.comcast.net and www.dnsec.comcast.net, so I'm doing that. =) And www.frontier.com has been broken for 6 days. Frank -Original Message- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Jared Mauch Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 2:48 PM To: Bajpai, Vaibhav Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: bing on v6 On May 21, 2015, at 3:34 PM, Bajpai, Vaibhav v.baj...@jacobs-university.de wrote: Dear NANOG, We do not see entries for www.bing.com since Sep 2013 anymore [1]. For sure this is only from our measurement vantage points, so may not be true globally. Does anybody know the backstory of what happened? [1] http://goo.gl/K1Zx4u (see: slide 23/32) There are a few others that turned it off after IPv6 day and/or launch such as bit.ly. I have heard that some of the outstanding top 25 properties are going to launch IPv6 ‘soon’, where that may be some point in 2015. I know many people have been hesitant as they don’t have the same resolver - ip mapping data for IPv6 yet. - jared
Re: Measuring DNS Performance Graphing Logs
Thanks a lot to Denis Fondras, Zachary, Andrew Smith, Christopher Morrow for your valuable advice. I've tried cacti but failed to get desired logs. i've also tried bind graph...but it consumes too much memory in the long run. can u suggest some suitable tools that i can measure the performance of the dns servers? like what shud b active and what shud not be in general safe dns server practice and check against my own settings or whatever the tool can query, something like nmap. this would be really helpful. i just need to make a report about my dns servers for my boss...and i'm clueless what to point out and what not to or how to evaluate it's performance. i'm running bind9 under unix environment. thanks in advance. On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 11:34 PM, Zayed Mahmud zayed.mah...@gmail.com wrote: Hello! This is my first message to NANOG's mailing list. I hope someone can help me. I was wondering which tool(s) can I use to measure the performance of my 3 DNS servers (1 primary, 1 secondary, 1 solely cacheDNS)? From the stats I would like to know if my DNS server is serving as it should be or if any of it's options are set inappropriately and others alike. I looked for a while but could not find any. Any help would be highly appreciated. I am running bind9 on UNIX platform. Question 2) I would also like to know how can I graph my DNS logs? And how can I integrate it to my CACTI server as well? I couldn't find any suitable plugin. Any suggestion? -- -- Best Regards, *Zayed Mahmud* *Senior Core IP Network Team,* *Banglalion Communications Limited, Bangladesh.* -- -- Best Regards, *Zayed Mahmud.*
Re: Peering and Network Cost
On 17 April 2015 at 16:53, Justin Wilson - MTIN li...@mtin.net wrote: Peering and peering on an exchange are two different things. Peering at an exchange has several benefits other than the simple cost of transit. If you are in a large data center which charges fees for cross connects a single cross connect to an exchange can save you money. Peering can also be a sales tool. If you buy from a VOIP provider and are peered with them your latency and such will go down. You also have more control over the QOS over that peer. This can be spun into marketing. Not to toot our own horn but we put together a list of benefits for our IX customers: http://www.midwest-ix.com/blog/?p=15 Also, a good article at: http://blog.webserver.com.my/index.php/the-benefits-of-hosting-at-internet-exchange-point/ I also have a similar working document that I'd welcome feedback on to improve; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1i2bPZDt75hAwcR4iKMqaNSGIeM-nJSWLZ6SLTTnuXNs/edit?usp=sharing I've used it once to help an ISP evalutate peering and started them in the world of public peering. I'm now going through that proces again with another ISP and again they will start public peering soon, having used this doc in both cases as an intro/FAQ for them. Cheers, James.
Cisco NX 5548UP Monitoring
Hi All, Thanks for reviewing my query. I am very new to NX OS, and I would like to know, what are the entities that we can monitor. Currently we are doing basic monitoring like interface, bandwidth usage -- With Regards, Sathish Kumar Ippani 9177166040
RE: Peering and Network Cost
We went that way too about 2 years ago. We usually pass around 25 to 40% of our North American traffic to the 4 IXes we're connected at a very low cost in Toronto and Montreal. One of the biggest IX we're connected to in New York is almost the same price per Mbps as some cheap transit providers but we're keeping our port for the connectivity improvement. Eric -Original Message- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: May 21, 2015 8:50 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Peering and Network Cost As a small ISP, I'll peer with everybody possible. ;-) It's mostly about cost, but the quality goes up as well. Some of the people we're working with saw an increase in consumption the moment they joined IXes. The quality of the connections improved, so the streaming video (assumed) was able to flow at a higher bit-rate. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com - Original Message - From: Rafael Possamai raf...@gav.ufsc.br To: James Bensley jwbens...@gmail.com Cc: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 7:40:23 AM Subject: Re: Peering and Network Cost James, curious to know... what size ISPs are they? In the last few years with the larger ones it has always been about lowering cost and increasing revenue, which throws the original idea of peering out the window (unless you are willing to pay). On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 4:52 AM, James Bensley jwbens...@gmail.com wrote: On 17 April 2015 at 16:53, Justin Wilson - MTIN li...@mtin.net wrote: Peering and peering on an exchange are two different things. Peering at an exchange has several benefits other than the simple cost of transit. If you are in a large data center which charges fees for cross connects a single cross connect to an exchange can save you money. Peering can also be a sales tool. If you buy from a VOIP provider and are peered with them your latency and such will go down. You also have more control over the QOS over that peer. This can be spun into marketing. Not to toot our own horn but we put together a list of benefits for our IX customers: http://www.midwest-ix.com/blog/?p=15 Also, a good article at: http://blog.webserver.com.my/index.php/the-benefits-of-hosting-at-internet-exchange-point/ I also have a similar working document that I'd welcome feedback on to improve; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1i2bPZDt75hAwcR4iKMqaNSGIeM-nJSWLZ6SLTTnuXNs/edit?usp=sharing I've used it once to help an ISP evalutate peering and started them in the world of public peering. I'm now going through that proces again with another ISP and again they will start public peering soon, having used this doc in both cases as an intro/FAQ for them. Cheers, James.
Re: Peering and Network Cost
On 21/May/15 18:59, Dave Taht wrote: Two things I am curious about are 1) What is the measured benefit of moving a netflix server into your local ISP network and 2) does anyone measure cross town latency. If we lived in a world where skype/voip/etc transited the local town only, what sort of latencies would be see within an ISP and within a cross-connect from, say a gfiber to a comcast? On average, 1ms for every 100km. We've seen this in practice - consistently - for any fibre deployed within the same town/city. Unless someone does something very wrong with the fibre, suffers terrible hardware issues, deliberately implements debilitating bandwidth management or does a piss-poor job of network design, it would be reasonably hard to go above +/- 1ms for traffic that originates and terminates within the same town, let alone 6 miles of speaking parties. Mark.
Re: Peering and Network Cost
On Thursday, May 21, 2015, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote: On 21/May/15 18:59, Dave Taht wrote: Two things I am curious about are 1) What is the measured benefit of moving a netflix server into your local ISP network and 2) does anyone measure cross town latency. If we lived in a world where skype/voip/etc transited the local town only, what sort of latencies would be see within an ISP and within a cross-connect from, say a gfiber to a comcast? On average, 1ms for every 100km. We've seen this in practice - consistently - for any fibre deployed within the same town/city. Unless someone does something very wrong with the fibre, suffers terrible hardware issues, deliberately implements debilitating bandwidth management or does a piss-poor job of network design, it would be reasonably hard to go above +/- 1ms for traffic that originates and terminates within the same town, let alone 6 miles of speaking parties. Mark. -- Sent from Gmail Mobile
RE: bing on v6
It literally came up within minutes of my posting. =) I know there are Frontier staff lurking on NANOG and I had already engaged a senior Frontier person on this last week, but he was dependent on their IT department to resolve this. Frank -Original Message- From: John Levine [mailto:jo...@iecc.com] Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 4:14 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Cc: frnk...@iname.com Subject: Re: bing on v6 And www.frontier.com has been broken for 6 days. Works fine for me over v6 although the chain of TLS certificates looks kind of funky. R's, John
Re: bing on v6
On May 21, 2015, at 3:34 PM, Bajpai, Vaibhav v.baj...@jacobs-university.de wrote: Dear NANOG, We do not see entries for www.bing.com since Sep 2013 anymore [1]. For sure this is only from our measurement vantage points, so may not be true globally. Does anybody know the backstory of what happened? [1] http://goo.gl/K1Zx4u (see: slide 23/32) There are a few others that turned it off after IPv6 day and/or launch such as bit.ly. I have heard that some of the outstanding top 25 properties are going to launch IPv6 ‘soon’, where that may be some point in 2015. I know many people have been hesitant as they don’t have the same resolver - ip mapping data for IPv6 yet. - jared
bing on v6
Dear NANOG, We do not see entries for www.bing.com since Sep 2013 anymore [1]. For sure this is only from our measurement vantage points, so may not be true globally. Does anybody know the backstory of what happened? [1] http://goo.gl/K1Zx4u (see: slide 23/32) Thanks! Best, Vaibhav = Vaibhav Bajpai Research I, Room 91 Computer Networks and Distributed Systems (CNDS) Lab School of Engineering and Sciences Jacobs University Bremen, Germany www.vaibhavbajpai.com = signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Re: Peering and Network Cost
On 21 May 2015 at 13:40, Rafael Possamai raf...@gav.ufsc.br wrote: James, curious to know... what size ISPs are they? In the last few years with the larger ones it has always been about lowering cost and increasing revenue, which throws the original idea of peering out the window (unless you are willing to pay). Yes agreed, I have seen the same behaviour too with larger companies although peering can lower costs as I will show below in the 2nd example. Typically though I hear what you are saying, if you are a larger transit consumer with larger commits you really have the weight to stand on your transit provider’s neck until they give you the price you want (which is pretty effective, transit really is dirt cheap these days if you have the traffic levels to back it up). With regards to your question I can't say too much as I'm not sure what I can and can't disclose. The first ISP was a small one with circa 1Gbps of total transit volume (at the time I carried them through the peering process, could be different now). They managed to peer off a third of their transit traffic requirement, so dropping a third of their transit made them a small but acceptable cost saving (since at the time they only had circa 1Gbps of total ingress/egress traffic). For them the marketing aspect of being at a big well know IX was/is very important. So from that rather small cost saving gained from reducing their transit commit with the overhead of peering, the value add for them was greatly boosted by being able to market their IX presence. In the period that followed joining their first IXP that ISP then gained further from a technical perspective as we managed to take direct peering’s across that IXP LAN to some VoIP upstreams and downstreams of theirs and a hosted service provider that ISP works with, and in all those cases that has reduced latency and packet loss which customers have directly noted on having a positive impact. The second ISP I'm now running this exercise for is a medium size ISP, they have about 5Gbps of transit requirements at present and are hoping to peer off half of that. They also intent to increase the transit requirements to circa 10G within the next couple of years, so if they peer off 50% ingress/egress traffic they stand to save quite a bit of money. A 10G peering port is usually a fixed priced so they will just see the ROI on that port grow over time hopefully. One important reason they will make a significant cost saving is due to legacy contracts such as some old PA space they can drop off which is very costly and old transit contracts still on high cost-per-Mbps tariffs My colleague on this expects to cut the transit bill literally in half by the end of the first year. Cheers, James.
Re: Peering and Network Cost
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Max Tulyev max...@netassist.ua wrote: Hi Roderick, transit cost is lowering close to peering cost, so it is doubghtful economy on small channels. If you don't live in Amsterdam/Frankfurt/London - add the DWDM cost from you to one of major IX. That's the magic. In large scale peering is still efficient. It is efficient on local traffic which is often huge. Two things I am curious about are 1) What is the measured benefit of moving a netflix server into your local ISP network and 2) does anyone measure cross town latency. If we lived in a world where skype/voip/etc transited the local town only, what sort of latencies would be see within an ISP and within a cross-connect from, say a gfiber to a comcast? Once upon a time I'd heard that most phone calls were within 6 miles of the person's home, but I don't remember the breakdown of those call percentages (?), and certainly the old-style phone system was achieving very low latencies for those kinds of traffic. On 04/15/15 17:28, Rod Beck wrote: Hi, As you all know, transit costs in the wholesale market today a few percent of what it did in 2000. I assume that most of that decline is due to a modified version of Moore's Law (I don't believe optics costs decline 50% every 18 months) and the advent of maverick players like Cogent that broker cozy oligopoly pricing. But I also wondering whether the advent of widespread peering (promiscuous?) among the Tier 2 players (buy transit and peer) has played a role. In 2000 peering was still an exclusive club and in contrast today Tier 2 players often have hundreds of peers. Peering should reduce costs and also demand in the wholesale IP market. Supply increases and demand falls. I thank you in advance for any insights. Regards, - R. Roderick Beck Sales Director/Europe and the Americas Hibernia Networks This e-mail and any attachments thereto is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may be proprietary and/or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this email, and any attachments thereto, without the prior written permission of the sender is strictly prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please immediately telephone or e-mail the sender and permanently delete the original copy and any copy of this e-mail, and any printout thereof. All documents, contracts or agreements referred or attached to this e-mail are SUBJECT TO CONTRACT. The contents of an attachment to this e-mail may contain software viruses that could damage your own computer system. While Hibernia Networks has taken every reasonable precaution to minimize this risk, we cannot accept liability for any damage that you sustain as a result of software viruses. You should carry out your own virus checks before opening any attachment. -- Dave Täht Open Networking needs **Open Source Hardware** https://plus.google.com/u/0/+EricRaymond/posts/JqxCe2pFr67
Re: Measuring DNS Performance Graphing Logs
On May 21, 2015, at 12:00 PM, char...@thefnf.org wrote: can u suggest some suitable tools that i can measure the performance of the dns servers? What sort of performance? What metrics are you trying to track? Please provide more details about exactly what you want. That will help us give you very specific suggestions. (We provide advice for free, have very busy schedules, the more specific you are the better). At the recent DNS-OARC meeting there was an interesting discussion about a new tool called DNSDIST. It’s part of PowerDNS and there is also a independent tar one can fetch. What is interesting about it is it can report on a lot of data about the performance of your DNS servers. Some people use a load balancer, and this will do that but be application aware and can easily route certain types of queries to another server. (e.g.: arpa requests to dedicated servers, same as domains that may be used/abused). It provides realtime graphs of CPU usage and query rates as well as average response times. You can set query rate limits and it will balance as you specify. This is useful as many people who know/use Linux have seen the issues with UDP kernel performance. If you’re not aware, do this: UDP: iperf -s -u iperf -u -c localhost -b 25000m eg: [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 4.50 GBytes 3.87 Gbits/sec 0.000 ms 84054/3374408 (2.5%) vs TCP: iperf -s iperf -c localhost [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 56.1 GBytes 48.2 Gbits/sec - Jared
