Re: DNS (was: pgfoundry is down)

From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>
To: pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: DNS (was: pgfoundry is down)
Date: 2007-11-16 19:05:39
Message-ID: 20071116190539.GX24718@crankycanuck.ca
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-www

On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 02:50:15PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > I could provide a slave NS as well.
>
> Sounds cool to me ... from what I can tell, a .org is allowed, what, 13 name
> servers? Just let me know IP(s) to add, and I'll make the change ...

Nobody is allowed more than 13 name servers, because 13 is the rule of
thumb for when the answer will go over the protocol limit and cause fallback
to TCP. (Actually, these days, it'll probably do EDNS0 instead, but
whatever.)

Anyway, the evidence seems to be that somewhere around 7 or 8, there's no
more benefit. After that, one usually finds that some of the servers never
get any traffic at all, because most DNS servers are robust enough not to go
down very often, and recursive resolvers remember who gave them the answer
last time, and usually keep going there.

A

--
Andrew Sullivan
Old sigs will return after re-constitution of blue smoke

In response to

Browse pgsql-www by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2007-11-16 19:05:46 add donate to /about
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2007-11-16 18:59:56 fix archives description on servers