search for: rrdns

...u rely on the internet for communications between the sites, then you technically do not qualify for an AS number. That makes BGP useless. That makes your solution be somewhere in the upper layer of the OSI model. 3) My idea was more on the lines of internet failure at the primary site and using RRDNS on top of that. If the secondary DNS server kicked in and pulled it's configs from the hidden master, then the hidden record wouldn't be configured for RRDNS because it is only used when the primary site fails. 4) My idea was also an application layer solution. Last time I checked, BGP w...

greetings! it appeared to me that previous upgrades were strained by sheer amount and size of the update as well as the eagerness of the CentOS userbase to get upgraded... this last one, well... it went so smooth that i believe many may have missed it happening so to speak :-) initially having been a large Galacticom aka Worldgroup BBS operator (remember those?) and then an ISP for going on 2

I currently have a single server with a few SIP and IAX upstreams for origination and termination with IAX clients. I am adding a second server that will have a much higher capacity and will be handling a larger call volume. However, this second server is not going to be geographically near the first. It will largely share the same upstreams. I would like for this to be an integrated system

...h fast (at least 100mbit) internet connections. If you are making lots of money using CentOS and are a hosting provider, please consider providing us a donated server so we can better distribute CentOS. Now on to the message :) ----------------------------------------- 1. mirror.centos.org is a rrdns of several machines, so that we can distribute the load for CentOS downloads across several servers. Distributed load is the only way we can serve more than 1 TiB per day for updates. (That's right, 1 TiB per day, ~30TiB per month, double the traffic of 3 months ago, 10x the traffic of a year...

What I would like to do is have two identical * servers which accept registrations of sip extensions 4000-4999. If I define a rrDNS or LinuxHA then I should have load-balanced registrations. However, say ext. 4001 is registered on *1 and 4002 is registered on *2, if 4001 tries to call 4002 then I would like to do something like: - lookup 4002 on *1, try to establish a call if it's REGISTERED here - if it's not registe...

It turns out that the release of Centos-3.3 was so popular, that it threw us way over the threshold of our ISP's, and now we are stuck with a _very_ large bill (as in an estimated 6TB of transfers). While in one hand I am ecstatic that we are so successful, but on the other hand, that is coming out of the developers pockets. The developers should be the last ones footing these bills (and this

...scratch:/holyscratch /n/holyscratch.tcp glusterfs transport=tcp,fetch-attempts=10,gid-timeout=2,acl,_netdev 0 0 holyscratch:/holyscratch /n/holyscratch.rdma glusterfs transport=rdma,fetch-attempts=10,gid-timeout=2,acl,_netdev 0 0 where holyscratch is a RRDNS entry for all the IPoIB interfaces for fetching the volfile (something it seems, just like peering, MUST be tcp? ) but, again, when running just dumb,dumb,dumb tests (160 threads of dd over 8 nodes w/ each thread writing 64GB, so a 10TB throughput test), I'm seeing all the traffic on the IPoIB...

...o somewhat balance the load between the listed servers. Unfortunately this wasn't the case. It just put a massive load on the first listed server and very minimal amount of traffic being sent to others. Maybe there is a setting that I don't know of but I had to change that to a single entry RRDNS method to distribute the load. On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 3:14 AM, <tell at posteo.de> wrote: > > > On 28.04.2016 11:16, Reindl Harald wrote: > >> Am 28.04.2016 um 11:00 schrieb tell at posteo.de: >> >>> i'm trying to figure out some specific things ab...

-------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "Petr \"Qaxi\" Klima" <qaxi at seznam.cz> Subject: Re: [Centos] Release of centos-3.3 ISP bill Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 07:56:24 +0200 Size: 2686 URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20041027/6185ecd0/attachment-0003.mht>

Hey, I thought I had been paying attention, but I do not know what is going on. On the mirrors, under centos-3, we now have directories named 3.1, 3.2 & 3.3. The CentOS-3 I have been using for some months came from 3.1. The 3.2 directory is dated September 11th and seems to be empty. The 3.3 directory is dated September 16th and has stuff in it, such as rpm's, but no header files

Hi ,? I recenlty configured the 2 node replica glusterfs , and I am having couple of issues? 1. As soon ?as a I reboot the node2 , the glusterfs on node1 is not available but when I reboot/shutdown node1 the glusterfs is available on node 0 , so please let me know if you guys have encountered the same issue 2. I am not able to mount the glusterfs mount at the time of reboot I had to do manually

On 28.04.2016 11:16, Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 28.04.2016 um 11:00 schrieb tell at posteo.de: >> i'm trying to figure out some specific things about Samba DFS. >> >> 1. What is the ordering method of a DFS Share with multiple servers >> (e.g. msdfs:serverB\\share,serverC\\share linkb ; Source: >>

On 05/16/2015 04:18 PM, Peter Lawler wrote: > People monitoring your connection know what you've updated, and what you > haven't, thus knowing what you may be vulnerable to, is a problem. If I'm monitoring your https connection: I know the list of mirrors. That's public information. I know when updates are released. That's also public. I know when you last