dns service

[dennyhalim]

do vps came with dns services?
or is it on our own vps resources?

so that 3 ip address we have means 2 for dns services?
all dns servers in one vps? all ip in one subnet?

if that's true,
wont that make our vps less reliable than shared hosting which get 2 dedicated dns servers on different subnet???

most (if not all) vps out there that i known usually let us use their dns services for free.

[homoludens]

do vps came with dns services?
or is it on our own vps resources?

You can have either. If you want jag to manage your DNS (the default option as far as I can recall) ask support to take care of that for you.

wont that make our vps less reliable than shared hosting which get 2 dedicated dns servers on different subnet???

Well, there is a single point of failure for DNS, but in the 3(?) years I've had my VPS, I've had about 30 seconds of downtime on my DNS server (during which period the database was also down).

If you need 0% downtime, a single VPS isn't going to meet your needs anyway,

[dennyhalim]

i dont need 0 downtime. if i need it, i'll probably setup my own, sync another vps on another hosting and perhaps even on another continent.

i need something more reliable and more powerful than shared/reseller hosting.
with the ease of shared/reseller hosting.

which mean, each time i setup an account on cpanel/whm, it automatically setup everything including (especially) dns on different subnets. without i need to open another ticket for each and every account created.
just like reseller hosting account.

is that how it works?

[homoludens]

i need something more reliable and more powerful than shared/reseller hosting. with the ease of shared/reseller hosting.

If you want power and ease, I'm not sure that a VPS is the right way forward. Hereabouts, semi-dedicated seems to be considered the best step up from shared.

which mean, each time i setup an account on cpanel/whm, it automatically setup everything including (especially) dns on different subnets. without i need to open another ticket for each and every account created.
just like reseller hosting account.

For that to work on different subnets, I think you would need to set up DNS clustering.

[Gwaihir]

You can have either. If you want jag to manage your DNS (the default option as far as I can recall) ask support to take care of that for you.

I'm not so sure of that. I seem to recall that the default is to handle your own nameservers (indeed, on the VPS) and that the alternative might cost extra (in particular if you have changes frequently) as it involves manual labour by support staff.

If you need 0% downtime, a single VPS isn't going to meet your needs anyway,

True, but due to the length of time DNS results tend to be cashed (including failures), I must agree with the topic starter that this does add a weakness one would much rather avoid.

If you want power and ease, I'm not sure that a VPS is the right way forward. Hereabouts, semi-dedicated seems to be considered the best step up from shared.

SDX is indeed the step up in power from shared, but it is not a reseller account. It doesn't come with whm and the ability to setup sub-accounts.

[homoludens]

I seem to recall that the default is to handle your own nameservers

I swear I recall the opposite. I'm not prepared to put money on it though. No tangible memory hooks. I kind of hoped support might've been a bit more definitive by now.

that the alternative might cost extra

To be sure, I don't really know what I'm allowed to ask support for. They seem to handle whatever I throw at them without complaint, but I've always tried to adopt a "fair use" approach. It's actually paying jag that I seem to be having most problems with these days. Sorry jag.

I must agree with the topic starter that this does add a weakness one would much rather avoid.

Failed lookups are cached? Sounds like a great way to perform DoS attacks. Luckily (not) it's just my own junk on my VPS. A single VPS ain't for serving paying folks in my opinion. And the opinion of several paying folk. You can probably blame that opinion on Draco (curse its bones).

[homoludens]

It is the storage of knowledge that something does not exist, cannot or does not give an answer that we call negative caching.

With this in mind negative caching should no longer be seen as an optional part of a DNS resolver.

Seems like the world and its internet disagrees with me.

So a temporary network failure can poison a DNS cache for hours and hours. I think taking the resource hit on requeries makes more sense. Or. Some third way between the two.