[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
DNS Reliability
- Subject: DNS Reliability
- From: philfagan at gmail.com (Phil Fagan)
- Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 14:48:46 -0600
- In-reply-to: <CAGFn2k1Od-DA_Eym8EzzBgOpSoRRu=QH2WJ8CxC8gBZ+vk57iA@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <CAPhg-wQDwJKeXS437bQon3mbVaDKW0YQitKTMNrB0_UheYzk2Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAGFn2k1Od-DA_Eym8EzzBgOpSoRRu=QH2WJ8CxC8gBZ+vk57iA@mail.gmail.com>
Good reference; thank you.
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Rubens Kuhl <rubensk at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Phil Fagan <philfagan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Everything else remaining equal...is there a standard or expectation for
>> DNS reliability?
>>
>> 98%
>> 99%
>> 99.5%
>> 99.9%
>> 99.99%
>> 99.999%
>>
>> Measured in queries completed vs. queries lost.
>>
>> Whats the consensus?
>>
>
> ICANN new gTLD agreements specified 100% availability for the service,
> meaning at least 2 DNS IP addresses answered 95% of requests within 500 ms
> (UDP) or 1500 ms (TCP) for 51+% of the probes, or 99% availability for a
> single name server, defined as 1 DNS IP address.
>
>
> Rubens
>
>
>
--
Phil Fagan
Denver, CO
970-480-7618