Hey thanks Tobias,
My post was meant to be a last resort and or just to try if it would
work in case of a DNS
I have 8 static IP# 's available and the SVXLINK is using one of them
through a DSL modem
that is setup in transparent mode. The ISP is actually pretty open with
ports that are by default
closed by others. Although, I am not sure if they block PORT 53 or let
it go. Will have to inquire,
but it seems it is open. I took Bills suggestion and entered the DNS
that he provided the IP#'s for
and it seems to work, at least I get echolink.org resolved. In the
meantime my ISP's DNS is working
In terms of caching name server, I disabled it in my setup. Any other
public access to my SVXLINK
box is restricted to only my own IP# set through firewall except of
course the Ports to SVXLINK.
I only can guess in terms of the DNS from my ISP, it may be badly setup,
since I have experienced the
the loss of DNS many times before.
I did setup a third DNS through my Domain Name registrar. For some
reason it did not do as expected.
Yep, I know about the advantages of using DNS as supposed to IP#'s , I
do it here myself with one of of my other
computer at times if there is some maintenance required that takes
longer. All I do is tell the DNS that the domain
is now respondig to another IP# which is actually a backup computer with
the Apache on it.
Reminds me, I'll have to check what DNS this box uses, cause if the DNS
is out nobody makes it to this machine either.
So , again let me point out that my suggestion was meant to be a last
one never knows how long it will take to rebuilt the DNS database.
Sorry, I did not include this point in my post.
It might be more serious and take longer. *Also, I'd like to point out
that it is a band aid and should be reversed once
DNS is available again.
*/I choose the IP# in the EchoLinkModule.conf because this is only a one
line change while other solutions
require more changes. Besides, it is much easier in my humble opinion to
change just one line back to the original state./
They actually switch us here in the US already for load balancing purpose.
Unfortunately, if you wind up on the Server that has corrupted data, oh
well you are out of Load Balancing.....
It has happened at least a couple of times, and I am sitting here the
system is awfully quiet nothing happens, so
I think lets do a check. Viola, the Echo-Link Directory did not exist
until I switched manually.
Nothing and Nobody is perfect!
It interesting to see all the responses to the subject, thats the way it
Thanks to all for your input!
Tobias Blomberg wrote:
> On Wednesday 19 August 2009 19:05:26 Norbert Seibert wrote:
>> Hi Bill,
>> thanks for your input.
>> There is probably always an other DNS that one can use.
>> I'll take your advice and try the DNS you suggested and see if it does
>> any better.
> Another way is to setup your own local cacheing nameserver. Possibly on the
> same computer that SvxLink runs. Then you can get rid of your ISP:s name
> servers. That is if the ISP allow outgoing DNS traffic that is not routed
> through their servers. I think probably many distributions have packages
> preconfigured for running a cacheing nameserver.
>> I still am convinced that the Internet is a playground for the not so nice
>> people to hack into others systems just to have a field-day, causing
>> more grieve and
>> problems then using a IP# to connect to another system.
> In my experience the DNS system is extremely stable and have not yet suffered a
> total takedown that I know of, even if it were close not too long ago when
> someone launched a massive DOS attack on the root name servers. However, the
> system survived that attack.
> Badly setup and ran ISP name servers can be a pain though. If they don't allow
> using external DNS servers I'd probably resort to using IP addresses as well
> but that would be the last thing I do when everything else have failed. I'd
> also switch as fast as possible to a new ISP where DNS work.
> As suggested by others in this thread, DNS can be used for redundancy and load
> balancing as well. That's what the servers.echolink.org address is for, which
> maps to four servers. Using the DNS name is also good if the folks running the
> directory server want to move to a new server. Then they could just point the
> name to a new address and no one will ever notice anything. No reconfiguration
> As another example, some time in the future maybe asia.echolink.org and
> europe.echolink.org will not point to the same address. You will "magically"
> be switched to your closest server if you have chosen the correct location
> But now we're a bit off topic :-)
> 73's de SM0SVX / Tobias
>> But it seems that at least two forum members are opposed to use numbers
>> rather than
>> names. However, I didn't mean to suggest that this is a permanent solution.
>> This may simply help to overcome an outage for the time being.
>> KJ6ZD, 73
>> Bill Stoddart wrote:
>>> You are better off using another DNS provider such as open dns than
>>> hard coding your addresses. DNS is used for load ballancing and
>>> distibution of tasks between various computers also. This is defeated
>>> by using the address as you argue.
>>> You are looking at the problem from the wrong side. You can fix the
>>> DNS issue very easily by using another service. If you are interested
>>> their addresses are 184.108.40.206 and 220.127.116.11
>>> Norbert Seibert wrote:
>>> Hi Darryl,
>>> thanks for your input.
>>> I am not sure if I am missing something. I tell my system only to use
>>> the IP number instead the fancy name of the
>>> Echolink server and thereby bypassing the DNS provided by my ISP.
>>> (My ISP's DNS will not have anything to resolve and besides it is broken
>>> at those times anyway, no worries about
>>> not being logged on.) For the time the DNS is down I am not going
>>> anywhere on the Internet using URL's and that
>>> goes for anybody that has an outside DNS that has problems.
>>> Most certainly, if the Echolink Server changes IP number the ones that
>>> have used the other IP number will be in
>>> the dust and unable to reach the new server IP number unless they
>>> resolve them self.
>>> In the beginning of the Internet there was only IP numbers, until
>>> someone figured out how to make another
>>> $100 Bucks or $200 per year per Domain Name, by setting up DNS's that
>>> resolve back to the IP number the distant system uses.
>>> Fortunately this monopoly has been taken out of their hands by court
>>> order and there is now competition
>>> that makes Domain Name registration reasonable and not rip off.
>>> DNS is merely a matter of convenience so that we don't need to maintain
>>> a large database for the systems we are
>>> using and connecting to, although it would be much better in
>>> consideration with all that garbage we receive because
>>> a DNS resolved to our system IP# and gave it away to some advertiser.
>>> Most Human beings have not the ability to remember Trillions of number
>>> It is easier for us to remember names like echolink.org, but doesn't
>>> mean that I can't connect to 18.104.22.168
>>> because a DNS either close by or somewhere down the internet has lost
>>> it. There are constantly hacker attacks throughout
>>> the Internet. I had logged over 1700 attacks to my own system over a
>>> time of just 1 Month. It is very possible that a hacker
>>> succeeds to disrupt a Domain Name Service faster than Echo-Link will
>>> change their IP#.
>>> Fixed public IP's stay with the owner until they give them up or they
>>> have a pool to choose from and make it a habit to rotate
>>> for some unknown reason or to disguise their identity. After all they
>>> are called fixed IP number.
>>> No matter how I connect to the EchoLink Main server it will decide my
>>> final destination anyway.
>>> My DNS issues are out of my hands, since I go through an ISP that
>>> provides DNS and has at least every
>>> three month or so a problems. My idea was based on the fact that I (and
>>> anybody else that has problems with DNS)
>>> don't know how long they will take to fix a DNS issue. By DNS issue I
>>> mean a corrupted data base that may take some time
>>> to fill up again. Or the Database is so corrupted that it needs manual
>>> fixing due to hacker attacks.
>>> Lets face it, the World with all the Technological Gadget isn't perfect
>>> and the more complicated it gets the more room for error
>>> is induced.
>>> The DNS problem may not even be with my provider, perhaps it is located
>>> elsewhere and they just didn't get updates
>>> and the Data Base runs low on fuel, if it takes long enough.
>>> Be my guest to get down to the root, I won't!! You need to understand
>>> that I am NOT running the Domain Name Service Server.
>>> Therefore, if I use the Directory Servers IP I will be able to run again.
>>> I might decide to go back to URL if I feel comfortable that there aren't
>>> any annoying DNS problems.
>>> Apparently, my post was pretty much misunderstood.
>>> "Now, having said that, you are free to hardcode the IP addresses in
>>> your SERVER
>>> config option, but it should not be made the default. "
>>> That's exactly what I suggested for those that feel brave enough to do
>>> so, not for a
>>> first time user/setup or as Default.
>>> That's why I posted so that someone with a DNS problem may get an idea
>>> on how to overcome the outage.
>>> I am still trying to find in my post where I said to make it the default.
>>> I hope that this clarified my intention, which is working by the way
>>> KJ6ZD, 73
>>> Darryl Ross wrote:
>>>> Hi All,
>>>> No, this is a really really bad idea.
>>>> In order to save an outage if there is a DNS issue (which should be a
>>>> rare issue and pretty easily solved), you want to set things up so that
>>>> if the Echolink servers ever need to change IP address, *everyone* will
>>>> have an Echolink outage, forever, until they update their config. Bad
>>>> bad bad!
>>>> There are a number of reasons why DNS exists, and one of those is so
>>>> that the clients do not need to know or care that the IP address is.
>>>> If you are having DNS issues you need to get the root cause of the
>>>> problem fixed, not hack around it which I guarantee will cause problems
>>>> down the track.
>>>> Now, having said that, you are free to hardcode the IP addresses in
>>>> your SERVER config option, but it should not be made the default.
>>>> My (network administrator pov) opinion.
>>>> Darryl, VK5HZ (ex VK5LBJ)
>>>> Norbert Seibert wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> recently I am experiencing some DNS problems. I am not sure if this is
>>>>> an issue that is related to a certain area.
>>>>> However, during the course of these DNS issues where the Service is
>>>>> not able to resolve an URL I have learned
>>>>> that it might be better to use a IP number to connect to Echo-Link
>>>>> Directory server rather than using an
>>>>> The Echo-Link IP is: 22.214.171.124
>>>>> In my opinion it may be advisable to enter the IP into the Server
>>>>> field SERVER=126.96.36.199 rather than the url servers.echolink.org,
>>>>> nawest.echolink.org or nasouth.echolink.org.
>>>>> In case the DNS you are using has technical difficulties your SVXLINK
>>>>> will still be able to
>>>>> connect to the Echo-Link Server, unless of course the Directory Server
>>>>> itself has problems too.
>>>>> KJ6ZD, 73
> Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
> trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
> what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
> Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
> Svxlink-devel mailing list