The story of a little DNS easter egg
blog.cloudflare.com
The story of a little DNS easter egg
1–10 of 25 posts
Re: The story of a little DNS easter egg
#2While playing these kinds of games on security sensitive services might not seem like a good idea, it lets someone take ownership of its development, and gain experience with its codebase.
Re: The story of a little DNS easter egg
#3I'm curious if cloudflare will ever just sell its anycast dns as a service.
Don't really need the other stuff but from what I can see their dns performance is on par with dnsmadeeasy/dyn/ultra
Re: The story of a little DNS easter egg
#4Wish they would open source it. I would have preferred if they would have contributed to PowerDNS instead of reinventing the wheel.
Was PowerDNS so awful it required a compete rewrite if so fair enough.
Re: The story of a little DNS easter egg
#5Wish they would open source it. I would have preferred if they would have contributed to PowerDNS instead of reinventing the wheel. Was PowerDNS so awful it required a compete rewrite if so fair enough.
+1 for open sourcing
Re: The story of a little DNS easter egg
#6Wish they would open source it. I would have preferred if they would have contributed to PowerDNS instead of reinventing the wheel. Was PowerDNS so awful it required a compete rewrite if so fair enough.
The other day CloudFlare's CEO stated the plan is to open source RRDNS: http://blog.cloudflare.com/cloudflares-new-waf-compiling-to-...
"We're planning on open sourcing RRDNS, the authoritative DNS server we built, when it gets to a state where it could be used by others."
Re: The story of a little DNS easter egg
#7I imagine the switch over to TCP is more because the response is likely to be larger than a UDP packet (which IIRC is why DNS-over-TCP exists) (looks to be the case [1]), as opposed to stopping an amplified reflection attack, but it's a nice side effect.
[1] http://serverfault.com/questions/404840/when-do-dns-queries-...
Re: The story of a little DNS easter egg
#8I imagine the switch over to TCP is more because the response is likely to be larger than a UDP packet (which IIRC is why DNS-over-TCP exists) (looks to be the case [1]), as opposed to stopping an amplified reflection attack, but it's a nice side effect. [1] http://serverfault.com/questions/404840/when-do-dns-queries-...
Nope. Normal DNS behaviour is to send the first few records over UDP and set the response truncated flag, which would still allow amplified reflection. They're intentionally sending no records at all in order to protect against this.
Re: The story of a little DNS easter egg
#9I'm wondering how RRDNS compares to Unbound (unbound.net) ?
Re: The story of a little DNS easter egg
#10One of the reasons they originally chose PowerDNS was that "it seamlessly allowed us to add new records without rebooting."
Can someone explain? What DNS server requires a reboot (or even restart) instead of a simple reload?