Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: irc server pool

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    47

    irc server pool

    can any one explane how to set up a irc server pool better know as around robbin server trying to set up one for domain dbrotherhood.info

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    In your server
    Posts
    2,677
    believe it or not, its really easy.

    personally i run 6 ircd's, and have simply created the irc.domain.com a record for each ip, so that basically i have 6 anames for irc.domain.com but they all point to diff servers, and usually the server that you are directed to is the closest to your ip

    hope that helps
    If you need help about anything to do with WHT, check out the Helpdesk

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    8,826
    OutHOST is correct. Round robin is pretty easy to achieve through DNS with multiple A records.

    Major IRC networks used this system in the past with pretty good success. I can't speak for whether it's still used, but it worked pretty well back then.

    -mike
    Mike G. - Limestone Networks - Account Specialist
    Cloud, Dedicated & Enterprise Hosting - Premium Network - Passionate Support
    DDoS Protection Available - Resell Dedicated Servers @LimestoneInc - 877.586.0555

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,895
    Quote Originally Posted by OutHOST View Post
    believe it or not, its really easy.

    personally i run 6 ircd's, and have simply created the irc.domain.com a record for each ip, so that basically i have 6 anames for irc.domain.com but they all point to diff servers, and usually the server that you are directed to is the closest to your ip

    hope that helps
    OutHOST is partially correct, however the "usually the server you are directed to is the closest..." is not entirely accurate. What you're referencing there is geoIP location based DNS services. A RR address is just that a truly random address.
    Justin Schurawlow :: Technology Enthusiast
    Schurawlow PC Repair
    Computer Services for the Lehigh Valley area
    Blog :: The Justin Schurawlow Blog

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    8,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Justin View Post
    OutHOST is partially correct, however the "usually the server you are directed to is the closest..." is not entirely accurate. What you're referencing there is geoIP location based DNS services. A RR address is just that a truly random address.
    You're right, Justin. Extending that line of thought, if the same user (computer) tries to connect to the round robin DNS hostname again, will he be connected to a different random server, or is the original server's IP address still cached from DNS and re-used by that user?

    -mike
    Mike G. - Limestone Networks - Account Specialist
    Cloud, Dedicated & Enterprise Hosting - Premium Network - Passionate Support
    DDoS Protection Available - Resell Dedicated Servers @LimestoneInc - 877.586.0555

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    In your server
    Posts
    2,677
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike - Limestone View Post
    You're right, Justin. Extending that line of thought, if the same user (computer) tries to connect to the round robin DNS hostname again, will he be connected to a different random server, or is the original server's IP address still cached from DNS and re-used by that user?

    -mike
    that depends on the users workstation setup, from my experience it will usually try a different ip but i have some times seen it use the same, also depends on which ip the dns servers give out
    If you need help about anything to do with WHT, check out the Helpdesk

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    5,026
    No it depends on the TTL of the DNS record. Set it really low so that it ISN'T cached for very long. Essentially you are going to ask DNS far more frequently for the ip assignment and that is what allows for the failover / VERY rough load balancing to work.
    Can't we all just get along

  8. #8
    hey, how to have this? i'm not too sure. say i got two servers/ip.

    then, i'll just create two A Record for irc.domain.com.
    irc.domain.com A 1.1.1.1
    irc.domain.com A 1.1.1.2

    two A Records? so when will the visitors go to .1? when they will be go to .2? or it will just randomly throw them into those two ip?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Fleet Street
    Posts
    3,243
    Quote Originally Posted by kryptocrap View Post
    hey, how to have this? i'm not too sure. say i got two servers/ip.

    then, i'll just create two A Record for irc.domain.com.
    irc.domain.com A 1.1.1.1
    irc.domain.com A 1.1.1.2

    two A Records? so when will the visitors go to .1? when they will be go to .2? or it will just randomly throw them into those two ip?
    Yep, pretty much - it'll be random.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    EU & USA
    Posts
    3,683
    Correct me if i'm wrong while RR might be working in some cases, but for a website it will still send 'visitors' to the IP even if the server is down, making your website unreachable for those who where unlucky of getting the down server IP from the pool. Not sure if that is the solution you are looking for.

    You might want to look at Edgedirector.com services.
    Last edited by 040Hosting; 06-21-2008 at 02:22 PM. Reason: added resource link

  11. #11
    There are a number of considerations that come to mind when managing a pool of servers.

    First, let me state that I know nothing about the requirements of irc in particular as regards sessions and stickiness.

    Having said that, there are two approaches to this sort of thing. The differentiating factor is the location of the servers.

    If the servers are in the same physical data center, then a hardware load balancer is usually the best solution.

    If the servers are in different, preferably far apart, data centers, then geolocation capable DNS is the better answer. The reason I say far apart, is that the user may as well benefit from an improvement in latency when pointed at the nearest server. This happens when they are farther apart, and hence each has a user population that is "local" to that server.

    If the server placement is a hybrid of the two mentioned above, for example, four servers arranged as pairs of servers in two data centers, then the ultimate setup is geolocation aware dns pointed at two hardware load balancers. BTW, this is a big part of the Akamai solution. There is more, but that is out of scope here.

    The public NTP server project worked on this a couple of years ago for pool.ntp.org which is really many NTP servers spread around the globe. They had some difficulty because of the DNS software they were trying to use. The final outcome was never published.

    In geolocation aware dns, the authoritative dns servers have multiple A records, but hand out only the best record when asked for the A record, or a related CNAME.

    As far as ttl, round robin and randomness, the theory goes that the caching dns server will tend to take the best record based upon response time. This is not guaranteed behaviour and is non-deterministic. It depends completely on the inner workings of the particular cache and is not specified in any RFC that I know of. It is simply an observation made by some knowledgeable people in the past.
    Last edited by plumsauce; 06-22-2008 at 05:58 PM.
    edgedirector.com
    managed dns global failover and load balance (gslb)
    exactstate.com
    uptime report for webhostingtalk.com

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Earth!!
    Posts
    647
    have A reconds with no big TTL would work more than fine in most cases (lets say 95%)
    Nobody is perfect! My name is nobody!

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    NJ, USA
    Posts
    6,400
    Quote Originally Posted by 040Hosting View Post
    Correct me if i'm wrong while RR might be working in some cases, but for a website it will still send 'visitors' to the IP even if the server is down, making your website unreachable for those who where unlucky of getting the down server IP from the pool. Not sure if that is the solution you are looking for.

    You might want to look at Edgedirector.com services.
    With IRC, it picks the server that replies fastest and you connect to it. It will never connect you to a "down" server.
    simplywww: directadmin and cpanel hosting that will rock your socks

    Need some work done in a datacenter in the NYC area? NYC Remote Hands can do it.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Fleet Street
    Posts
    3,243
    Quote Originally Posted by Dougy View Post
    With IRC, it picks the server that replies fastest and you connect to it. It will never connect you to a "down" server.
    What do you mean? That's not really correct if I'm reading it right...

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    NJ, USA
    Posts
    6,400
    Quote Originally Posted by avythe View Post
    What do you mean? That's not really correct if I'm reading it right...
    What "should" it be?

    in an IRC round robin, if you have 18 servers added, you will never go to the one that's down
    simplywww: directadmin and cpanel hosting that will rock your socks

    Need some work done in a datacenter in the NYC area? NYC Remote Hands can do it.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Fleet Street
    Posts
    3,243
    Quote Originally Posted by Dougy View Post
    What "should" it be?

    in an IRC round robin, if you have 18 servers added, you will never go to the one that's down
    There's no difference between a pool of A records and an "IRC round robin." The DNS server (and most IRC clients that I know of) won't check that the address is connectable before handing it to you.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    NJ, USA
    Posts
    6,400
    Quote Originally Posted by avythe View Post
    There's no difference between a pool of A records and an "IRC round robin." The DNS server (and most IRC clients that I know of) won't check that the address is connectable before handing it to you.
    I'm aware there's no difference. I have had a network of 4 leaf's connected to a hub, two of the leaf's went down (99% of the time I end up on one of those leaf's). I connected, and ended up on another server without any failures.
    simplywww: directadmin and cpanel hosting that will rock your socks

    Need some work done in a datacenter in the NYC area? NYC Remote Hands can do it.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Fleet Street
    Posts
    3,243
    Quote Originally Posted by Dougy View Post
    I'm aware there's no difference. I have had a network of 4 leaf's connected to a hub, two of the leaf's went down (99% of the time I end up on one of those leaf's). I connected, and ended up on another server without any failures.
    Coincidence or cache. There's no checking implemented on either protocol by default.

  19. Newsletters

    Subscribe Now & Get The WHT Quick Start Guide!

Related Posts from theWHIR.com

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •