-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Astrodog wrote:

On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Jon Kibler<Jon.Kibler@aset.com> wrote:

...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

Hi,

Is anyone else that uses ServerBeach hosting having issues with their name servers (ns[12].geodns.net) failing to resolve their hostnames?

Jon K

I was just thinking about the irony in some asking if their DNS provider is down, via e-mail.

That being said, they seem down for me, too.

--- Harrison

That would normally make sense. However, Server Beach uses different name servers for its customers than it uses for itself. Jon K -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkp/XwQACgkQUVxQRc85QlObrwCgj2RkFrOwT1ok+q8xNXcrrI7K xdgAn3PDE8TWB+kNuabugwaAGCe3f/P6 =Lbja -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ================================================== Filtered by: TRUSTEM.COM's Email Filtering Service http://www.trustem.com/ No Spam. No Viruses. Just Good Clean Email.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Tim Franklin wrote:

...

Is anyone else that uses ServerBeach hosting having issues with their name servers (ns[12].geodns.net) failing to resolve their hostnames?

I haven't seen any recent problems, although I have the geodns servers slaving from my server. Are you doing the same, or generating DNS directly on their NS (through the web front end)?

Regards, Tim.

I am being lazy and using their servers directly. The problem has gone away. SB got back to me about 30 minutes after I opened a trouble ticket through my.sb and said, "At around 0930 this morning our DNS servers, ns1.geodns.com and ns2.geodns.com experienced an issue where name resolution was not completing. We have not as of yet identified the root cause of the issue, but services were restored shortly thereafter at around 0940. At this time, we would like to ask that you please check your services again to ensure that all is in order. If they are not, please do let us know and we will investigate further." I strongly disagree with their time frame estimates, as I saw an outage that lasted at least 55 to 60 minutes, not 10 minutes. I first observed the outage about 09:50 EDT, spent about 20 minutes investigating it and trying to verify it was not a routing issue (I checked from 9 different locations that I could not get name resolution), and another 10 minutes tracking down my password and reporting it -- at 10:20. Name services were still failing at 10:45, but were working correctly at 10:50 when I received the above message from SB. To me, it looks like that SB has a *CRITICAL* infrastructure design problem if they have a situation were both name servers can fail simultaneously. I hope this does not mean that they have a single dual-homed box that is really both name servers!! I would really want/expect them to have two physically different servers in two vastly diverse physical locations (or even better, multiple boxes hidden by anycast), but the type of failure observed tends to argue against such diversity. I hope this is a situation that SB will correct, as it is simply unacceptable to have all of one's name servers simultaneously fail. Jon K - -- Jon R. Kibler Chief Technical Officer Advanced Systems Engineering Technology, Inc. Charleston, SC USA o: 843-849-8214 c: 843-813-2924 (NEW!) s: 843-564-4224 http://www.linkedin.com/in/jonrkibler My PGP Fingerprint is: BAA2 1F2C 5543 5D25 4636 A392 515C 5045 CF39 4253 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkp//ykACgkQUVxQRc85QlNB9ACeKqHeeHTMLOE8STHffSvYLBto Yk0An2FNGMYiIReL7TgfP6ZGCyOEspBO =YyJH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ================================================== Filtered by: TRUSTEM.COM's Email Filtering Service http://www.trustem.com/ No Spam. No Viruses. Just Good Clean Email.