Monthly Archives: August 2017

A DNS Failover Service – Is it right for you?

Over the years, DNS Failover has become a very popular service primarily due to the fact that it is relatively inexpensive and fairly easy to deploy and manage. But is it the right solution for your organization? In this article, we’ll outline what DNS failover is and provide an overview of the benefits and appropriate uses for this type of technology.

What is DNS Failover?

First, we must define what DNS failover is before trying to understand whether or not it offers benefits. Simply put, DNS failover is an add-on feature of a DNS Service and is a system that consists of two main components. The first component monitors servers or devices behind IP addresses in an effort to determine their state, e.g. up or down. Second, it uses the server state information to automatically update the IP address associated with a particular DNS record, such as an ‘A’ record, ‘AAAA’ record or otherwise. It may consist of other components designed to deliver email or SMS alerts in the event that an outage is detected or changes are made, but any successful DNS Failover solution must consist of at least the first two essential elements.

Common Applications for DNS Failover

So now that we know what DNS Failover is, what is the most common use for it and what applications can benefit from this method of automating DNS updates?

Perhaps the most obvious use that comes to mind is to control web traffic. Failing over between redundant web servers is a very common implementation, and is probably the most frequently used application. From the failover system’s perspective, it really doesn’t matter where the two IP addresses are, so long as they are different. So because of this, it could be used to failover between two different servers at the same datacenter, servers at different datacenters (even across the globe) or it could be even the same server with two different network connections, each having their own IP address, for example a server at a corporate office with one IP on each of two different T1 lines.

Naturally, what can be done for web servers can also be done for mail servers, FTP servers, streaming media servers or VoIP servers, just to name a few. Essentially, if it has an IP address and can be monitored externally, DNS Failover can route traffic to it when it is up, and redirect to another server when it is down.

Common Features

Most well thought out DNS Failover implementations should have at least a few basic features. First, and probably paramount to failover success, is monitoring. The more advanced the monitoring feature-set, the better. This allows you to detect outages as accurately as possible. At a minimum, we would expect functionality to fine-tune the monitors and to run them from multiple geographic locations in order to create an accurate picture for when failover actually needs to occur. Of course, it should probably go without saying that the monitoring and alerting functionality should be able to send alerts via email, SMS or both.

Another important feature, in our opinion, is some flexibility in how traffic is routed. The most common traffic routing configurations are sequential or round-robin. Sequential allows you to list servers in the order you want traffic to be delivered so that if the server with a priority of 1 goes down, it sends traffic to the server with a priority of 2 and so forth. Round-robin publishes a DNS record for every one of the active and available servers so that traffic is distributed amongst them as evenly as possible. When one goes down or becomes otherwise unavailable, it is simply removed from the pool allowing traffic to continue being distributed amongst the remaining server(s).

And finally, you’ll probably want a feature that prevents the automatic re-announcement of a server’s IP address when it comes back online. In the case of a server providing static web content, re-adding may not pose a problem, but in the case of a database server requiring resynchronization, this little feature is critical.

Limitations of DNS Failover

The biggest limitation when using DNS Failover for application switching is the ability to quickly detect an outage and make a change that will actually propagate the Internet in relatively short order to seamlessly redirect users, both current and future. Even the best DNS Failover solutions that accurately detect an outage and update DNS quickly and accurately still leave customers at the mercy of a well known problem called caching. This is an extremely tough issue to resolve because it is not within the DNS Failover service providers control.

Caching issues are created when ISPs ignore TTL values, or they can be caused by something as simple as default Internet browser settings which are configured to cache images in order to improve page load times. The shortest compliant TTL value is 60 seconds, and for some ISPs this is simply too short. AOL, for example, is known to ignore low TTL values and substitute them with something much higher, say 15 minutes, for example. But other than those ISPs who ignore TTL values, a 60 second setting in theory *should* propagate the Internet relatively quickly.

Is there anything better?

Depending on your application, Cloud Load Balancing might be a better fit. That, of course, should be dictated by your specific requirements for uptime, flexibility for balancing traffic among servers and how critical the need to avoid caching created by TTL avoidance or just plain old browser settings. Cloud Load Balancing is similar in design, but offers extremely powerful traffic management solutions similar to hardware load balancers (except on a global scale) for serious online organizations.

Tips For Providing Reliable Uber Car Service

If you have been providing Uber car service to earn a little extra cash, you must make sure to keep your vehicle in good condition.  Making sure that your car is operating efficiently and that it is both safe and ready when you have to transport passengers will help you to maximize your earnings, get better ratings and enjoy your time working with Uber to the fullest.
Getting positive ratings is essential for succeeding with Uber.  It is not necessary to have the latest and most stylish vehicle in order to get amazing ratings, but it is important to make sure that your vehicle is in good repair and that it is clean.  Going to a detail shop to have these professionals deep clean the interior and exterior of your car is best.  You’ll make a good impression on your passengers when you have a clean car and this will also help your ratings.  After having had your car detailed by professionals, you will be able to save money by performing your own ongoing maintenance.  Make sure to vacuum the floors and the seats every week and to put your car through the car wash when fueling up.  You can extend the benefits of professional detail work by maintaining this schedule and it will help you keep your vehicle in good condition with minimal effort.
Make sure that your windshield wipers are working like they should and replace these once they begin to show the signs of wear.  Change your oil and replace the air filter according to the manufacturer’s recommendations and keep your tires inflated and have them rotated when changing out the oils.  These are simple, affordable steps that you can take that will prime your vehicle for offering the best possible Uber car service.
Earning cash by providing Uber car service is a very simple and easy way to make money, but you have to have a reliable auto.  Use these tips to improve your ratings and increase your overall income.

Learn more about uber partners and drivers

How to find car insurance in Texas

Auto Insurance in TexasWhen the insurer refuses to pay a claim, the insured may bring an action against it so that you can compel payment. Under the nongovernment schemes, no  cheaptexasautoinsurance.net rates  action may be commenced before notice and proof loss requirements, including submission to examination through the physician appointed through the insurer, have been met and the amount of benefits payable ascertained.  In Bc, proof of loss should be completed.  Although it’s not specified, additionally it is premature to commence an action ahead of the expiry with the deadline for payment.  This also applies for the government schemes with the exception of that in The state. In Bc, disputes relating to the reasonableness of claims for expenses for necessary medical, surgical, dental, hospital, ambulance, professional nursing services, physiotherapy, chiropractic treatment, occupational therapy or speech therapy must be listed in arbitration.65 There is nothing beneath the British Columbia scheme (or any other scheme) to prevent the parties to the dispute about entitlement from submitting that dispute to arbitration, there is nothing to compel that course of action.
Inside the state, the us government insurer is as simple as statute given http://www.cheaptexasautoinsurance.net/  exclusive jurisdiction to take care of disputes about claims for compensation under the scheme. Whenever a claim is denied, the insurer must substantiate that call and communicate its good reasons to the claimant written.67 Within Sixty days of this notification, the claimant may obtain a report on your decision and a review officer has authority to confirm, quash or amend your decision.68 There is a further right of appeal of the choice of your review officer to an administrative tribunal. And don’t forget to visit Cheaptexasautoinsurance.net for low rates!
In those jurisdictions that allow court actions against the insurer, commencement for these actions http://www.cheaptexasautoinsurance.net/  must occur before the expiry of- the statutory limitation period. Under the regulations in Bc, this era extends for two years after (i) the date from the accident, or (ii) where benefits are already paid, the date the claimant received the past payment.70 Out of all other common-law provinces the period is measured from the date on which the reason for action arose. The length of this point is 2 years in Manitoba,71 the Northwest Territories and also the Yukon Territory,72 and one year in Alberta, Hawaii system is just like the dispute resolution mechanism under the New Zealand Accident Compensation Act 1982. The apparent conflict involved in having one of the parties judge its very own cause generally seems to work in the context of presidency insurance. The appeal authorities function autonomously and appear to discover up against the insurer as frequently for it. See G. Palmer, Compensation for Incapacity (1979). Learn more at the Texas Insurance website here!

Texas Automobile insurance Laws, Requirements, Quotes, and Rates.

texas auto insuranceUnlike Keeton-O’Connell, Hart-Magnuson will not feed on the victim’s collateral resources to cut back the price of insurance, This proposal allows the victim to maintain all benefits from|advantages car insurance quotes of|advantages from other sources, except those based on public assistance. This way, the motorist is allowed flexibility  for making his automobile coverage compatible with other styles of duplicate protection, By tailoring the total insurance program, a cost-saving is achieved. The exclusion of double payments where public cash is obtained is definitely an attempt to blend national health insurance, when it is passed, with national no-fault car insurance.
Again differing from most no-fault plans,  Hart-Magnuson will not depend upon arbitration as a replacement for your courts. auto insurance There are many when the right to bring suit, particularly in which the insured purchases the pain-and- suffering option, can be exercised.
In the plan, there’s a curious twist to the payment of attorney’s fees. If the dispute has ended compulsory no-fault coverage, the insurance company pays its insured’s lawyer even if the company wins, unless the suit is fraudulent or not earned good faith. The master plan ignores the overworked no-fault argument that reduction of court congestion can be a legitimate basis for abolishing basic rights. Certainly does maintain the courthouse door open to accident victims who is able to spend the money for optional coverages or running afoul of these insurance company.

The Hart-Magnuson plan demands federal no-fault automobile insurance. It will not follow the Department of Transportation’s guideline that all state develop its very own system of no-fault insurance, as long as it’s generally compatible with common no-fault objectives. Hart-Magnuson believes the states cannot or is not going to visit a true no- fault plan.
Throughout its history, the car insurance industry has successfully resisted federally imposed standards. As a result of DOT report and Hart-Magnuson, the states may find the companies, beneath the threat of national regulation, coming forward with innovative suggestions that belongs to them. But if your Hart-Magnuson method of reform be¬come law, the federal government will regulate auto insurance the very first time. And also on the Washington horizon is definitely an all-encompassing federal system of medical health insurance regulated and controlled from the government.
The Nixon Administration went on record as favoring the idea of no-fault insurance. Department of Transportation Secretary John Volpe has openly embraced the formula for auto insurance reform drafted by Keeton-O’Connell. So far, the administration has backed the DOT endorsement of your gradual changeover to no-fault by the individual states. DOT guidelines notwithstanding, it really is probable that lots of years will pass before each state adopts a no-fault approach that satisfies the government government. Several states who have converted to partial no-fault packages-including Oregon, Delaware, Illinois, and South Dakota-have done this with plans which can be unrelated to the people suggested from the department. The greatest strength with the department’s approach is its dedication to gradualness. This may give rival reforms, for example that proposed for Maryland, a way to contend with radical no-fault.

Because of state-by-state reform, it’s unlikely that sufficient support will appear in Congress for that passage with the Hart-Magnuson federal plan. It faces the combined opposition of the administration, the insurance coverage industry, the American Trial Lawyers Association, as well as the proponents of other methods of reform. But failure with the states to devise a winning game plan for automobile insurance reform would go far to produce the climate for congressional action over a nationwide plan.