Search Results

Search found 181 results on 8 pages for 'haproxy'.

Page 5/8 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  | Next Page >

  • haproxy: Is there a way to group acls for greater efficiency?

    - by user41356
    I have some logic in a frontend that routes to different backends based on both the host and the url. Logically it looks like this: if hdr(host) ends with 'a.domain.com': if url starts with '/dir1/': use backend domain.com/dir1/ elif url starts with '/dir2/': use backend domain.com/dir2/ # ... else if ladder repeats on different dirs elif hdr(host) ends with 'b.domain.com': # another else if ladder exactly the same as above # ... # ... else if ladder repeats like this on different domains Is there a way to group acls to avoid having to repeatedly check the domain acl? Obviously there needs to be a use backend statement for each possibility, but I don't want to have to check the domain over and over because it's very inefficient. In other words, I want to avoid this: use backend domain.com/url1/ if acl-domain.com and acl-url1 use backend domain.com/url2/ if acl-domain.com and acl-url2 use backend domain.com/url3/ if acl-domain.com and acl-url3 # tons more possibilities below because it has to keep checking acl-domain.com. This is particularly an issue because I have specific rules for subdomains such as a.domain.com and b.domain.com, but I want to fall back on the most common case of *.domain.com. That means every single rule that uses a specific subdomain must be checked prior to *.domain.com which makes it even more inefficient for the common case.

    Read the article

  • Appears to be "randomly" switching between the acl matched backend and the default backend

    - by Xoor
    I have HAProxy acting as a proxy in front of: An NGinx instance An in-house load balancer in front of multiple dynamic services exposed with socket.io (websockets) My problem is that from time to time my connections are proxied correctly to my socket.io cluster, and then randomly it fallsback to routing to NGinx which obviously is annoying and meaningless since NGinx isn't mean't to handle the request. This happens when requesting for URLs of the format : http://mydomain.com/backends/* There's an ACL in the HAProxy config to match the '/backends/*' path. Here's a simplified version of my HAProxy config (removed extra unrelated entries and changed names): global daemon maxconn 4096 user haproxy group haproxy nbproc 4 defaults mode http timeout server 86400000 timeout connect 5000 log global #this frontend interface receives the incoming http requests frontend http-in mode http #process all requests made on port 80 bind *:80 #set a large timeout for websockets timeout client 86400000 # Default Backend default_backend www_backend # Loadfire (socket cluster) acl is_loadfire_backends path_beg /backends use_backend loadfire_backend if is_loadfire_backends # NGinx backend backend www_backend server www_nginx localhost:12346 maxconn 1024 # Loadfire backend backend loadfire_backend option forwardfor # This sets X-Forwarded-For option httpclose server loadfire localhost:7101 maxconn 2048 It's really quite confusing for me why the behaviour appears to be "random", since being hard to reproduce it's hard to debug. I appreciate any insight on this.

    Read the article

  • Blocking IP addresses Load Balanced Cluster

    - by Dom
    Hi We're using HAproxy as a front end load balancer / proxy and are looking for solutions to block random IP addresses from jamming the cluster. Is anyone familiar with a conf for HAProxy that can block requests if they exceed a certain threshold from a single IP within a defined period of time. Or can anyone suggest a software solution which could be placed in front of HAProxy to handle this kind of blocking. Thanks Dom--

    Read the article

  • Do HTTP reverse proxies typically enable HTTP Keep-Alive on the client side of the proxied connection and not on the server side?

    - by LostInComputer
    HAProxy has the ability to enable HTTP keep-alive on the client side (client <- HAProxy) but disable it on the server side (HAProxy <- server). Some of our clients connect to our web service via satellite so the latency is ~600ms and I think that by enabling keep-alive, it will speed things up a bit. Am I right? Is this supported by Nginx? Is this a widely implemented feature in other software and hardware load balancers? What else besides HAProxy?

    Read the article

  • Windows Load-Balancing, Forward-Proxying Software

    - by LandonC
    Does anyone know of any Windows software that will do forward-proxying load-balancing, like HAProxy does? There are tons of reverse-proxy solutions, but I can't find any that do what HAProxy does, that is, allows you to load-balance a group of forwarding-proxies. I have a proxy farm (don't ask) that I need to round-robin balance. HAProxy will do it, but is very unstable on Windows. Thoughts? I'd really appreciate it. And yes, this is an actual, production environment question.

    Read the article

  • High Availability Configuration using Heartbeat and Pacemaker

    - by pradeepchhetri
    I have the following setup: I have configured high availability between two load balancers (HAProxy) so that if HAProxy1 get down, the floating IP gets transferred to the other load balancer HAProxy2, hence all the clients will get the response from HAProxy2, which at the back-end is doing LB among the sme two webserver. This is for removing the single point of failure in case of only one HAProxy. Whenever I stops the hearbeat in HAProxy1, the floating IP goes to HAProxy2. But I want to configure such that whenever the process haproxy goes down, the floating IP should get assigned to HAProxy2. Can someone tell me how to implement it ?

    Read the article

  • Setting up a reverse proxy [on hold]

    - by mrwooster
    I am looking for the best solution for setting up a very low maintenance reverse proxy for a production website (example.com). The setup is as follows: A blog with will be hosted on heroku, and will reside at example.com/blog A static info page which will be hosted on S3 and will reside at example.com/signup A dynamic content management system, provided and hosted by an external vendor which will respond to requests for any other pages. The two solutions which come to mind are: Use HAProxy Ask the external vendor to reverse proxy requests for /blog and /signup The obvious solution would be to use HAProxy, but, if at all possible, I would like to avoid having to setup and maintain another server (especially such a critical one). I came across a company called Snapt which offers hosted HAProxy solutions, but its more geared towards load-balancing than reverse proxying. Option 2 is a possibility, but gives us very little control over changes and configuration. I see a lot of sites hosting blogs on /blog so this must be fairly common practice, am I missing an obvious solution?

    Read the article

  • How do I load balance between two Linux machines?

    - by William Hilsum
    Inspired by the Stack Overflow network, I am now obsessed with HAProxy and trying to use it myself. At the moment, each HAProxy box has got two network cards (well, two configured, I can have a maximum of 4 and wasn't sure if they needed their own one for management between the boxes). On both machines, the backend one (eth1) is a private IP that goes to a switch connected to the webservers, and the front facing one (eth0) has a public internet IP that is routed straight though. In addition, I have created an additional virtual ip for eth0 called eth0:0 which has got a third public ip address. I just about get how to use it for load balancing between multiple web servers that are behind it, but, I am failing to load balance between the two HAProxy boxes - they appear to fight for the virtual IP, but, this does not appear to be a smart solution. Now, by using the virtual shared IP address, this solution appears to work and does seem to give me maximum uptime, but, is this the correct way to do it, or is there a smarter way? I have been looking at other Linux packages such as keepalived, but, I have only been using Linux (server) for a week now and am at the limits of my understanding. Is there anyone who has done this before and can you advise anything for maximum uptime?

    Read the article

  • connections in FIN_WAIT and CLOSE_WAIT state

    - by Raj
    I would like to elaborate the setup so You guys can understand the question and answer more accurately. I have HAProxy as load-balancer, 4 webservers (apache 2.2.3) and one database server (MySQL 5). I am monitoring these servers by nagios. I have disabled the keepalive on apache as we have only 8GB of memory. Now what happens whenever I receive alerts for high memory and cpu utilization, I have observed that the connections from apache to database server hang in established mode (keepalive with timeout value of 7200) and at other side means connections between haproxy and apache shows status as FIN_WAIT on haproxy server and CLOSE_WAIT at apache side. I also see the huge memory swapping and apache taking the most of the memory. I did strace on apache process and did not find any information. strace gets attached to apache process but did not produce any output. The processlist on Mysql server show s those processes in sleep mode. The application on webserver is Magento a php application. if you need further information please let me know. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How to configuration keepalived on Amazon EC2?

    - by oeegee
    I rad some article. Keepalived over GRE tunnel for failover on VPS environment http://blog.killtheradio.net/how-tos/keepalived-haproxy-and-failover-on-the-cloud-or-any-vps-without-multicast/ but, I don't know how to configuration? and How to call this architecture? only I Know that How to config Master/Backup configuration at keepalived. What I want to know that How does work keepalived? I want to design this.... XMPP Server(EC2) | ------------------------------------------------- keepalived Master(EC2) - keepalived Backup(EC2) HAProxy #1 HAProxy#2 ------------------------------------------------- | Casandra#1 Casandra#2 Casandra#3 Casandra#4 Thanks! but What I want to know how to work on keepalived with unicast patche modul. ELB is expansive. and this is first totaly design. [Flow] ELB -- XMPP Server -- ELB -- Casandra ELB | XMPP#1 XMPP#2 XMPP#3 XMPP#4 | ELB | Casandra#1 Casandra#2 Casandra#3 Casandra#4 and change first design. [Flow] ELB -- XMPP Server -- HAProxy Master(Casandra Farm) -- Casandra ELB | XMPP#1 XMPP#2 XMPP#3 XMPP#4 | ------------------------------------------------- keepalived Master(EC2) - keepalived Backup(EC2) HAProxy#1 HAProxy#2 ------------------------------------------------- | Casandra#1 Casandra#2 Casandra#3 Casandra#4 this is second. [Flow] ELB -- HAProxy(XMPP Farm) -- XMPP Server -- HAProxy(Casandra Farm) -- Casanda It's OK? ELB | HAProxy#1 HAProxy#2 HAProxy#3 HAProxy#4 XMPP#1 XMPP#2 XMPP#3 XMPP#4 | Casandra#1 Casandra#2 Casandra#3 Casandra#4

    Read the article

  • Stunnel too many clients

    - by davidsmalley
    I'm trying to hook up stunnel and haproxy to forward https connections through to some backend servers. I've got haproxy setup right, and I seem to have stunnel set up right. Trouble is that when I hit the setup with a load test after a while I start to see these log entries: 2010.05.05 11:24:43 LOG7[3498:3086792368]: https accepted FD=512 from 10.195.158.225:52579 2010.05.05 11:24:43 LOG4[3498:3086792368]: Connection rejected: too many clients (=500) I guess I've hit a limit somewhere but I wasn't sure how to fix it, there doesn't seem to be a config file option for stunnel to change this. Does anyone know how to configure stunnel for a potentially large number of connections?

    Read the article

  • HA Proxy and Disaster Recovery - Only access server if others are down?

    - by ben2004uk
    Why I expect this is not the best way to solve the problem, I got thinking tonight. I'm thinking about geo-locating servers. Given we have a load balancer + two servers to handle traffic in NA (North America) and one server in the EU. If the two US servers die, is it possible to get HAProxy to direct traffic automatically to the EU one. However, I don't want to use a roundrobin approach for the EU - just the two US ones. The EU should only be hit when the other two are down. Does anyone know how to configure HAProxy to do this? Thanks Ben

    Read the article

  • forwardfor information is missing

    - by FAFA
    I use following configuration to load balance https connections, using haproxy 1.4.8. SSL offloading is done by apache. listen ssl_to_waf 192.168.101.54:443 mode tcp balance roundrobin option ssl-hello-chk server wafA 192.168.101.61:444 check listen ssl_from_waf 192.168.101.61:445 balance roundrobin option forwardfor server webA 192.168.101.46:80 check For HTTP requests this works great, requests are distributed to my Apache servers just fine. But for HTTPS request, I lose the "forwardfor" information. I need to save the client IP address. How can I use HAproxy to load balance across a number of SSL servers, allowing those servers to know the client's IP address?

    Read the article

  • Load balancing without a load balancer?

    - by Tom
    I have 4 nginx-powered image servers on their own subdomains which users would access at random. I decided to put them all behind a HAProxy load balancer to improve the reliability and to see the traffic statistics from a single location. It seemed like a no-brainer. Unfortunately, the move was a complete failure as the load balancer's 100mbit port was completely saturated with all requests now going through it. I was wondering what to do about this - I could get a port upgrade ($$) or return to 4 separate image servers that are randomly accessed. I thought about putting HAProxy on each image server which would in turn route to another image server if that server's nginx service was having trouble. What would you do? I would like to not have to spend too much additional money.

    Read the article

  • Throttling apache downloads selectively

    - by Synchro
    I have a linux box running Debian Sarge (old I know) and apache 2.0.54. It serves two kinds of files - regular web pages and small images, and a lot of large podcast mp3s. The podcast downloads swamp the connection and make the rest of the site unresponsive, so I'm looking to throttle the data transfer rate (not the request rate) of just the podcasts. I've set up haproxy using this technique which does what it says it will, but solves a different problem - even only 5 simultaneous podcast downloads is enough to saturate the link. In a perfect world, haproxy would support per-connection throttling, but it doesn't. So far I've looked at mod_bw (won't compile for me, seems unsupported), mod_cband (unsupported, widely reported as problematic) and iptables using tc. The iptables approach would allow me to throttle things, but would not be at all selective, slowing down everything on the server, not just the podcasts, so would just move the bottleneck without changing overall behaviour. Ideas?

    Read the article

  • Use backups if unavailable (not just down)

    - by PriceChild
    Using haproxy, I want: A pool of 'main' servers and 'backup' servers, though they don't necessarily have to be in separate pools. Each backend has a low 'maxconn' (in this case 1) Clients should not wait in a queue. If there are no immediately available servers in the 'main' pool they should be shunted to the 'backup' pool without delay. Right now I have one backend, 'main' servers have an absurdly high weighting and it 'works'. acl use_backend + connslots is along the right lines but without the patch in my own answer it isn't perfect. Bonus points for not requiring a modified haproxy binary.

    Read the article

  • GeoIP and Nginx

    - by JavierMartinez
    I have a nginx with geoip, but it is not working rightly. The issue is the next: Nginx are getting geodata from $_SERVER['REMOTE_ADDR'] instead of $_SERVER['HTTP_X_HAPROXY_IP'], which have the real client ip. So, the reported geodata belongs to my server ip instead of client ip. Does anybody where could be the error to fix it? Nginx version and compiled modules: nginx -V nginx version: nginx/1.2.3 TLS SNI support enabled configure arguments: --prefix=/etc/nginx --conf-path=/etc/nginx/nginx.conf --error-log- path=/var/log/nginx/error.log --http-client-body-temp-path=/var/lib/nginx/body --http-fastcgi-temp-path=/var/lib/nginx/fastcgi --http-log-path=/var/log/nginx/access.log --http-proxy-temp-path=/var/lib/nginx/proxy --http-scgi-temp-path=/var/lib/nginx/scgi --http-uwsgi-temp-path=/var/lib/nginx/uwsgi --lock-path=/var/lock/nginx.lock --pid-path=/var/run/nginx.pid --with-pcre-jit --with-debug --with-file-aio --with-http_addition_module --with-http_dav_module --with-http_geoip_module --with-http_gzip_static_module --with-http_image_filter_module --with-http_realip_module --with-http_secure_link_module --with-http_stub_status_module --with-http_ssl_module --with-http_sub_module --with-http_xslt_module --with-ipv6 --with-sha1=/usr/include/openssl --with-md5=/usr/include/openssl --with-mail --with-mail_ssl_module --add-module=/usr/src/nginx/source/nginx-1.2.3/debian/modules/nginx-auth-pam --add-module=/usr/src/nginx/source/nginx-1.2.3/debian/modules/nginx-echo --add-module=/usr/src/nginx/source/nginx-1.2.3/debian/modules/nginx-upstream-fair --add-module=/usr/src/nginx/source/nginx-1.2.3/debian/modules/nginx-dav-ext-module --add-module=/usr/src/nginx/source/nginx-1.2.3/debian/modules/nginx-syslog --add-module=/usr/src/nginx/source/nginx-1.2.3/debian/modules/nginx-cache-purge nginx site conf (frontend machine) server { root /var/www/storage; server_name ~^.*(\.)?mydomain.com$; if ($host ~ ^(.*)\.mydomain\.com$) { set $new_host $1.mydomain.com; } if ($host !~ ^(.*)\.mydomain\.com$) { set $new_host www.mydomain.com; } add_header Staging true; real_ip_header X-HAProxy-IP; set_real_ip_from 10.5.0.10/32; location /files { expires 30d; if ($uri !~ ^/files/([a-fA-F0-9]+)_(220|45)\.jpg$) { return 403; } rewrite ^/files/([a-fA-F0-9][a-fA-F0-9])([a-fA-F0-9][a-fA-F0-9])([a-fA-F0-9][a-fA-F0-9])([a-fA-F0-9][a-fA-F0-9])([a-fA-F0-9]+)_(220|45)\.jpg$ /files/$1/$2/$3/$4/$1$2$3$4$5_$6.jpg break; try_files $uri @to_backend; } location /assets { if ($uri ~ ^/assets/r([a-zA-Z0-9]+[^/])(/(css|js|fonts)/.*)) { rewrite ^/assets/r([a-zA-Z0-9]+[^/])/(css|js|fonts)/(.*)$ /assets/$2/$3 break; } try_files $uri @to_backend; } location / { proxy_set_header Host $new_host; proxy_set_header X-HAProxy-IP $remote_addr; proxy_pass http://10.5.0.10:8080; } location @to_backend { proxy_set_header Host $new_host; proxy_pass http://10.5.0.10:8080; } } nginx.conf (backend machine) http{ ... ## # GeoIP Config ## geoip_country /etc/nginx/geoip/GeoIP.dat; # the country IP database geoip_city /etc/nginx/geoip/GeoLiteCity.dat; # the city IP database ... } fastcgi_params (backend machine) ### SET GEOIP Variables ### fastcgi_param GEOIP_COUNTRY_CODE $geoip_country_code; fastcgi_param GEOIP_COUNTRY_CODE3 $geoip_country_code3; fastcgi_param GEOIP_COUNTRY_NAME $geoip_country_name; fastcgi_param GEOIP_CITY_COUNTRY_CODE $geoip_city_country_code; fastcgi_param GEOIP_CITY_COUNTRY_CODE3 $geoip_city_country_code3; fastcgi_param GEOIP_CITY_COUNTRY_NAME $geoip_city_country_name; fastcgi_param GEOIP_REGION $geoip_region; fastcgi_param GEOIP_CITY $geoip_city; fastcgi_param GEOIP_POSTAL_CODE $geoip_postal_code; fastcgi_param GEOIP_CITY_CONTINENT_CODE $geoip_city_continent_code; fastcgi_param GEOIP_LATITUDE $geoip_latitude; fastcgi_param GEOIP_LONGITUDE $geoip_longitude; haproxy.conf (frontend machine) defaults log global option forwardfor option httpclose mode http retries 3 option redispatch maxconn 4096 contimeout 100000 clitimeout 100000 srvtimeout 100000 listen cluster_webs *:8080 mode http option tcpka option httpchk option httpclose option forwardfor balance roundrobin server backend-stage 10.5.0.11:80 weight 1 $_SERVER dump: http://paste.laravel.com/7dy Where 10.5.0.10 is frontend private ip and 10.5.0.11 backend private ip

    Read the article

  • HA Proxy won't load balance my web requests. What have I done wrong?

    - by Josh Smeaton
    I've finally got HA Proxy set up and running in a way I think I want. However, it is not load balancing the web requests it receives. All requests are currently being forwarded to the first server in the cluster. I'm going to paste my configuration below - if anyone can see where I may have gone wrong, I'd appreciate it. This is my first stab at configuring web servers in a *nix environment. First up, I have HA Proxy running on the same host as the first server in the apache cluster. We are moving these servers to virtual later on, and they will have different virtual hosts, but I wanted to get this running now. Both web servers are receiving their health checks, and are reporting back correctly. The haproxy?stats page correctly reports servers that are up and down. I've tested this by altering the name of the file that is checked. I haven't put any load onto these servers yet. I've just opened up the URLs on several tabs (private browsing), and had several co-workers hit the URL too. All of the traffic goes to WEB1. Am I balancing incorrectly? global maxconn 10000 nbproc 8 pidfile /var/run/haproxy.pid log 127.0.0.1 local0 debug daemon defaults log global mode http retries 3 option redispatch maxconn 5000 contimeout 5000 clitimeout 50000 srvtimeout 50000 listen WEBHAEXT :80,:8443 mode http cookie sessionbalance insert indirect nocache balance roundrobin option httpclose option forwardfor except 127.0.0.1 option httpchk HEAD health_check.txt stats enable stats auth rah:rah server WEB1 10.90.2.131:81 cookie WEB_1 check server WEB2 10.90.2.130:80 cookie WEB_2 check

    Read the article

  • Load balanced IIS. Should I use NLB, or linux-based reverse proxy, or something else?

    - by growse
    What would be the best approach for load-balancing at least 2-3 Windows 2008 R2 IIS webservers running a multitude of .NET applications? My choices appear to be: 1) Hardware-based network device load balancer, like a Cisco CSS 2) Windows NLB 3) Some sort of linux based proxy, either haproxy or other The three servers sit as VMs on a vSphere farm, so I have the ability to clone to up the instance count in times of high load. I control the switch that the vSphere hosts are plugged into (Cisco 3750), but don't control the switching/routing infrastructure beyond that to the clients. (1) Is too expensive, and probably overkill for my needs. I've included this in case someone figures out a cunning way to do it on my existing network kit, which I doubt. (2) would seem to be the obvious "built-in" option, but seems to be quite fiddly messing around with network interfaces, multicast, and generally other things that seem to be needlessly complex. It's also fairly stupid, in that it can't remove hosts from the pool if they start throwing 500 errors or otherwise go wrong (3) is the most interesting option, as it would appear to offer the most flexibility and customizability, but without having to mess around with the network. However, while I'm familiar with the reverse-proxy capabilities of lighttpd etc, I'm not that well read on other options like HAProxy, which might be able to offer a lot more. Which would you go for, and is there anything I've not thought of?

    Read the article

  • Elastic Load Balancing in EC2

    - by Dom
    Hi Its been on the cards for a while, but now that Amazon have released Elastic Load balancing what are your thoughts on deploying this solution for a high-traffic web app. Should we replace HAProxy or consider ELB as a complimentary service in front of HAProxy Appreciate any comments or suggestions Thanks Dom

    Read the article

  • serving a blog at domain.com/blog when dns for domain.com is pointing elsewhere

    - by user143715
    there is a blog hosted on one machine (apache) (currently at blog.domain.com) and we'd like to move it to domain.com/blog. dns for domain.com is pointed at an haproxy machine load balancing a few nginx app servers. the machine hosting the blog is not behind that load balancer. considering i have complete control over the configuration of everything, whats the most straightforward way to get this to submit to my will and have the blog served from domain.com/blog?

    Read the article

  • Redirecting specific traffic to amazon AWS

    - by yoav r
    My server has recieved sudden increase in the (read) web traffic, requesting many map image tiles, and apache cannot handle it. Apache cannot even handle the redirections! The average load I get in my CentOS machine is more then 200.. Is there some software out there that can redirect SOME of the traffic, such as only the traffic from specific directory (such as http://example.com/maptiles/abc.png) to a different address (sucha as http://s3.amazonaws.com/mytiles/abc.png) ? can this be done by HAProxy?

    Read the article

  • Using proxy server to redirect MySQL traffic to multiple servers using standard port?

    - by FrenchFry
    Is it possible to redirect MySQL (tcp) traffic to multiple servers based on domain name alone? Our DNS is setup to point several sub-domain aliases to one proxy machine. (running haproxy and iptables). We would like to redirect all database traffic through this proxy server and route it to the appropriate db server, WITHOUT deviating from the standard MySQL port. dev.domain1.com:3306 -- dbDevServer.domain1.com:3306 test.domain1.com:3306 -- dbTestServer.domain1.com:3306 prod.domain1.com:3306 -- dbProdServer.domain1.com:3306 Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Do i need a dedicated server for load balancing?

    - by Ben
    I'm completely new to the concept of load balancing so i hope this question isn't a "stupid question" because i've been searching around and im having a hard time understanding this. So to my understanding, in order to load balance, i need a separate machine with an ip address i can direct all traffic to. I initially thought i needed to rent 3 dedicated servers, one for load balancing and the other two as backend servers. Would a dedicated server be too much for a load balancer or do hosting companies have special types of computers for that process? Then i read somewhere else that i can install a load balance software in both of the two servers and configure it in a way that doesn't require me to rent another machine/dedicated server for load balancing. So im a bit confuse on how to actually implement a load balancer and whether or not i need a dedicated server for the sole purpose of acting as a load balancing machine. Also, i was recommended to use HAproxy so i'll be heading that direction for load balancing.

    Read the article

  • DNS failover across multiple datacenters?

    - by Jae Lee
    I've got a site that is starting to get a lot of traffic and just the other day, we had a network outage at the datacenter where our loadbalancer (haproxy) is hosted at. This worried me as despite all my efforts of making the system fully redundant, I still could not make our DNS redundant, which I think isn't an easy solution. Only thing I was able to find was to sign up for DNS failover from places like dnsme, etc .... but they cost too much for budding startups. Even their Corporate plan only gives you 50 million queries per month and we use that up in a week. So my question is, are there any self hosted DNS we can do that provides the failover like how dnsme does it?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  | Next Page >