Date
1 - 2 of 2
Proposal: BOSH-aware DNS server
Amit Kumar Gupta
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 |
|
Hi,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
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, |
|