Mike,
I was wondering what everyone does to load balance over multiple bgp
feeds. We currently have 5 bgp feeds with 2 providers. Do you just
randomly pick networks, or use something like netflow to try and pick
the best path.
You might be interested by the following papers :
S. Uhlig and O.
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005, Dean Anderson wrote:
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Dean Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd rather expect this sort of behavior with anycasted servers...
Where do you see any
I've heard rumour that the problem is not limited to NS59 and NS60 at
WORLDNIC.com, and that use of the the truncate bit is involved in some
cases, forcing queries to use TCP.
Original Message
Subject: Re: Root DNS Servers 2
From: Patrick W. Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date:
On Sat, 23 Apr 2005, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
oh well, I tried to stay quiet :) Probably the PPLB problem isn't quite as
simple as: you have pplb you can't do anycast. I'd imagine that you have
to have some substantial difference in the paths that the PPLB follows,
yes? like links to differing
Here is a good mesage on the subject from DNSOP. It explains the PPLB
loadbalancing on BGP links is not the only way the problem can arise.
PPLB on interior links can also be a problem.
The following statement from RFC 1546 is probably most significant:
It is important to remember that
Probably to avoid the snafus of the early @Home rollouts, when at least
one person was accused of stealing cable because the field tech
installed her cable modem without an RF filter...
http://www.joabj.com/Balt/CableRobbing.html
-C
On Apr 18, 2005, at 5:08 PM, Andy Johnson wrote:
Alex
Per Packet Load Balancing is not TCP friendly. (this discussion is orthogonal
to DNS)
PPLB leads to packet reordering.
Quite a few empirical and theoretical papers have been published (in peer
reviewed fora and elsewhere)
that discuss the negative consequences of packet reordering. A Google
On Sat, 23 Apr 2005, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
Been happening for many years. How do you think the original
Boardwatch / Keynote speed tests were gamed? If you have any real
experience on the Internet, you are well acquainted with anycast web
servers.
Gaming speed tests sounds
On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 04:13:22PM -0400, Dean Anderson wrote:
[ snip ]
Well, PPLB isn't the end of the world. But PPLB is coming, and the smart
people will be prepared for it. They dumb people, well, they're dumb.
What can be expected from dumb people?
With proliferation of high speed
Something I seem to have found and wonder if anyone else sees this.
One of my users has been using round robin DNS to attempt to load
balancing using two IP addresses. A query for www.whatever gives both
addresses with a TTL of zero. One address is obviously less than the
other numerically.
Been happening for many years. How do you think the original
Boardwatch / Keynote speed tests were gamed? If you have any real
experience on the Internet, you are well acquainted with anycast web
servers.
Let me, let me, let me! It involved an err... locating linux boxes with the
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (James) [Sat 23 Apr 2005, 23:10 CEST]:
With proliferation of high speed circuits and continuing trend of lower
cost of bandwidth, PPLB is becoming more obsolete for many people that
implemented it in the past. What is becoming more common is non-PPLB
based setup, such as
12 matches
Mail list logo
