RSSAC026v2 definition of Instance
The current definition of Instance in the RSSAC026 lexicon is somewhat ambiguous.
When anycast routing is used to allow more than one server to have the same IP address, each one of those servers is commonly referred to as an instance. For root servers, one refers to "an instance of J-root" to mean one of the network locations answering to J-root’s IP address.
The first sentence says it's a server, and the second sentence says it's a location. In the current draft, the definition has been changed to this:
*When anycast routing is used to allow more than one server to have the same IP address, each one of those servers is commonly referred to as an instance or anycast instance. For root servers, one refers to "an instance of J-root" to mean one of the network servers answering to one of J-root’s IP addresses.*
So now it's a server on one address (which implies there's another instance on J-root's other IP address). Paul thought this could use some discussion and I agree. In my mind, using the word 'server' to define something in this context is confusing. Is a server a piece of equipment or a software process? I think of an instance as "equipment used at a location used by an operator to provide DNS service". If I had to define it as a single word, I would say it's a location. At one location for D-root we have 4 Dell servers in the same rack. They are each talking BGP with a router that's using ECMP to reach them. Each Dell is answering on v4 and v6. I consider this one instance. What do others think? That's my $.02, -Karl
On Thursday, 23 January 2020 18:59:19 UTC Karl Reuss wrote:
The current definition of Instance in the RSSAC026 lexicon is somewhat ambiguous.
When anycast routing is used to allow more than one server to have the same IP address, each one of those servers is commonly referred to as an instance. For root servers, one refers to "an instance of J-root" to mean one of the network locations answering to J-root’s IP address. The first sentence says it's a server, and the second sentence says it's a location. In the current draft, the definition has been changed to this: *When anycast routing is used to allow more than one server to have the same IP address, each one of those servers is commonly referred to as an instance or anycast instance. For root servers, one refers to "an instance of J-root" to mean one of the network servers answering to one of J-root’s IP addresses.* So now it's a server on one address (which implies there's another instance on J-root's other IP address).
Paul thought this could use some discussion and I agree.
i agree also.
In my mind, using the word 'server' to define something in this context is confusing. Is a server a piece of equipment or a software process? I think of an instance as "equipment used at a location used by an operator to provide DNS service". If I had to define it as a single word, I would say it's a location.
since we've known here of cases where two instances in adjacent racks each had multiple servers and its own local load balancer but spoke to two different internet exchanges which were present in the same data center, "location" is wrong. that's in fact where we got "instance".
At one location for D-root we have 4 Dell servers in the same rack. They are each talking BGP with a router that's using ECMP to reach them. Each Dell is answering on v4 and v6. I consider this one instance.
What do others think?
i agree, that's an "instance", because it is a dedicated collection of server and network equipment operated as a root name server, having upstream connectivity not shared by any other instance. however, a lot of rootops no longer operate their own equipment in some "location(s)", and so share server and network equipment with "instances" of other root servers. so, "instance" will have to be defined to account for virtualization including both the cloudflare model and the PCH model. i don't know yet exactly how to do that. noting that c-root has always used dedicated server equipment but has never had dedicated network equipment (it plugs into cogentco edge routers which may also serve other customers), "instance" may have to be defined in terms of unique servers which might be virtual, having unique upstream connectivity among other instances of the same root server. by leaving out "equipment" and leaving out "network", a version of "instance" might suit all current and contemplated root server deployments, including the cloudflare and PCH models. -- Paul
On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 12:18 PM Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> wrote:
On Thursday, 23 January 2020 18:59:19 UTC Karl Reuss wrote:
The current definition of Instance in the RSSAC026 lexicon is somewhat ambiguous.
When anycast routing is used to allow more than one server to have the same IP address, each one of those servers is commonly referred to as an instance. For root servers, one refers to "an instance of J-root" to mean one of the network locations answering to J-root’s IP address. The first sentence says it's a server, and the second sentence says it's a location. In the current draft, the definition has been changed to this: *When anycast routing is used to allow more than one server to have the same IP address, each one of those servers is commonly referred to as an instance or anycast instance. For root servers, one refers to "an instance of J-root" to mean one of the network servers answering to one of J-root’s IP addresses.* So now it's a server on one address (which implies there's another instance on J-root's other IP address).
Paul thought this could use some discussion and I agree.
i agree also.
In my mind, using the word 'server' to define something in this context is confusing. Is a server a piece of equipment or a software process? I think of an instance as "equipment used at a location used by an operator to provide DNS service". If I had to define it as a single word, I would say it's a location.
since we've known here of cases where two instances in adjacent racks each had multiple servers and its own local load balancer but spoke to two different internet exchanges which were present in the same data center, "location" is wrong. that's in fact where we got "instance".
At one location for D-root we have 4 Dell servers in the same rack. They are each talking BGP with a router that's using ECMP to reach them. Each Dell is answering on v4 and v6. I consider this one instance.
What do others think?
i agree, that's an "instance", because it is a dedicated collection of server and network equipment operated as a root name server, having upstream connectivity not shared by any other instance. however, a lot of rootops no longer operate their own equipment in some "location(s)", and so share server and network equipment with "instances" of other root servers. so, "instance" will have to be defined to account for virtualization including both the cloudflare model and the PCH model. i don't know yet exactly how to do that.
noting that c-root has always used dedicated server equipment but has never had dedicated network equipment (it plugs into cogentco edge routers which may also serve other customers), "instance" may have to be defined in terms of unique servers which might be virtual, having unique upstream connectivity among other instances of the same root server. by leaving out "equipment" and leaving out "network", a version of "instance" might suit all current and contemplated root server deployments, including the cloudflare and PCH models.
I think it may be a bit cleaner to discuss anycast (generally) and then what is meant by an anycast instance, and finally what an anycast instance of a particular root server identity is. Here's a brief attempt at this: Anycast is the routing technique of advertising the reachability of a
prefix from more than one router, typically (but not exclusively) as a global BGP announcement.
An *anycast routing instance* is a single such routing announcement. The *anycast instance of a root server identity* is the server or set of
servers reachable via a *single anycast routing instance* of the corresponding identity's IPv4 and/or IPv6 prefix.
It leaves unspecified any of the (IMHO unimportant details) of what the servers actually are (physical/virtual, dedicated/shared), and leaves the "network location" as an abstracted "anycast routing instance", for similar reasons. It also allows for flexibility in whether the servers are single-stack or dual-stack for IPv4/IPv6 announcements/services. Brian
+1. Get BlueMail for Android On 29 Jan 2020, 08:20, at 08:20, Brian Dickson <brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 12:18 PM Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> wrote:
On Thursday, 23 January 2020 18:59:19 UTC Karl Reuss wrote:
The current definition of Instance in the RSSAC026 lexicon is somewhat ambiguous.
When anycast routing is used to allow more than one server to have the same IP address, each one of those servers is commonly referred to as an instance. For root servers, one refers to "an instance of J-root" to mean one of the network locations answering to J-root’s IP address. The first sentence says it's a server, and the second sentence says it's a location. In the current draft, the definition has been changed to this: *When anycast routing is used to allow more than one server to have the same IP address, each one of those servers is commonly referred to as an instance or anycast instance. For root servers, one refers to "an instance of J-root" to mean one of the network servers answering to one of J-root’s IP addresses.* So now it's a server on one address (which implies there's another instance on J-root's other IP address).
Paul thought this could use some discussion and I agree.
i agree also.
In my mind, using the word 'server' to define something in this context is confusing. Is a server a piece of equipment or a software process? I think of an instance as "equipment used at a location used by an operator to provide DNS service". If I had to define it as a single word, I would say it's a location.
since we've known here of cases where two instances in adjacent racks each had multiple servers and its own local load balancer but spoke to two different internet exchanges which were present in the same data center, "location" is wrong. that's in fact where we got "instance".
At one location for D-root we have 4 Dell servers in the same rack. They are each talking BGP with a router that's using ECMP to reach them. Each Dell is answering on v4 and v6. I consider this one instance.
What do others think?
i agree, that's an "instance", because it is a dedicated collection of server and network equipment operated as a root name server, having upstream connectivity not shared by any other instance. however, a lot of rootops no longer operate their own equipment in some "location(s)", and so share server and network equipment with "instances" of other root servers. so, "instance" will have to be defined to account for virtualization including both the cloudflare model and the PCH model. i don't know yet exactly how to do that.
noting that c-root has always used dedicated server equipment but has never had dedicated network equipment (it plugs into cogentco edge routers which may also serve other customers), "instance" may have to be defined in terms of unique servers which might be virtual, having unique upstream connectivity among other instances of the same root server. by leaving out "equipment" and leaving out "network", a version of "instance" might suit all current and contemplated root server deployments, including the cloudflare and PCH models.
I think it may be a bit cleaner to discuss anycast (generally) and then what is meant by an anycast instance, and finally what an anycast instance of a particular root server identity is.
Here's a brief attempt at this:
Anycast is the routing technique of advertising the reachability of a
prefix from more than one router, typically (but not exclusively) as a global BGP announcement.
An *anycast routing instance* is a single such routing announcement.
The *anycast instance of a root server identity* is the server or set of
servers reachable via a *single anycast routing instance* of the corresponding identity's IPv4 and/or IPv6 prefix.
It leaves unspecified any of the (IMHO unimportant details) of what the servers actually are (physical/virtual, dedicated/shared), and leaves the "network location" as an abstracted "anycast routing instance", for similar reasons. It also allows for flexibility in whether the servers are single-stack or dual-stack for IPv4/IPv6 announcements/services.
Brian
participants (3)
-
Brian Dickson -
Karl Reuss -
Paul Vixie