Re: Proposal: BOSH-aware DNS server


Guillaume Berche
 

Hi,

Following Amit's suggestion, I'm reposting here the question I had on the
"Proposal Bosh-aware DNS server" at [3] to get more bosh eyes on it:

Could the rationale for moving out of a standard DNS implementation
(powerDNS) can be reminded, or related pointers given?

Is powerDNS deprecation mainly motivated to the low HA capability of the
currently bosh-director hosted version of powerDNS ? If so, could the HA
limitations be overcome?

It seems to me an out-of-the-box robust DNS implementations can bring many
of what this proposal needs and mentions: scalability/caching, robustness,
security, zone affinity (in the form of geoDNS), health checks?, and
reuse/cost efficiency aspects...

Did this proposal consider leveraging off-the-shelf DNS implementation (say
powerDNS), its standard APIs to update DNS records, such as DNS Update [1]
(as an alternative to a bosh-agent based communication scheme), [2], and a
possibly hierarchical and redundant deployment as to ensure scalability and
high availability ?

[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2136
[2] https://doc.powerdns.com/md/authoritative/dnsupdate/
[3]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GsS1S7XFJoeLR1kYY46u4pcX08lRDvXUrjkssuyKI4s/edit?disco=AAAAAwvjPJ8

Thanks in advance,

Guillaume.

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:46 PM, Amit Gupta <agupta(a)pivotal.io> wrote:

Hi all,

In service of the initiative to remove the hard dependency on Consul for Locks
& Service Discovery in CF Runtime
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/16O5Rk5tOmHc2Qeya7soVHoASAgrH9jYZ0V3fS58dY14/edit>,
we are proposing BOSH-native DNS in the form of a BOSH-aware DNS server.
Please see the proposal document
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GsS1S7XFJoeLR1kYY46u4pcX08lRDvXUrjkssuyKI4s/edit#>
for more details and discussion.

Regards,
Amit

Join cf-bosh@lists.cloudfoundry.org to automatically receive all group messages.