[90819] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: h.gtld-servers.net offline...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher L. Morrow)
Thu Jun 15 12:15:46 2006
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 16:15:06 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Christopher L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow@verizonbusiness.com>
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0606150846470.4468@sokol.elan.net>
To: "william(at)elan.net" <william@elan.net>
Cc: Will Hargrave <will@harg.net>,
Joe Abley <jabley@ca.afilias.info>, NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, william(at)elan.net wrote:
>
> On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, Will Hargrave wrote:
> >>
> >> Joe Abley wrote:
> >>> I think you're mistaken about the server being off-line, since I can see
> >>> it just fine from many places. The RIPE NCC dnsmon tool can also see it
> >>> from its various probes:
> >> I did (and do) check on multiple ASs that I run and asked a few others to
> >> check, also checked looking glasses and so on.
> >
> > So, out of curiousity, i loss of 1 of 13 gtld servers important? I believe
> > (though I could be mistaken) that these are actually anycast as well. I
> > think dropping even 2-3 of the servers probably wouldn't affect overall
> > performance would it? won't bind pick the 'best' place to ask regardless
> > and stick/prefer that over 'slow' servers?
>
> I think he was right to report it here - its operational issue with very
> large TLD. But it is certainly nothing to seriously worry about as dns
> compensates for such problems.
Ooops, sorry, I didn't mean to harangue Will for reporting it, I was
asking if it was in fact not a big deal because the system has
compensation methods in place to deal with even 2-4 device outages.
sorry for the confusion.
